Well Skybird, I'm tired and need to hit the post button. Let me know if any of this doesn't make sense, we'll go from here I guess!

This argument we're having is concerning two points, at least as I see it. Identity; and to what standards you hold a religion, or more precisely what standards you hold those that identify themselves with that religion

If you hold people to a religious standard that is absolutely stringent, in fact the same standard as the extremists do, what are you accomplishing? That is what you seem to do when you say true Muslims are all extremists. As it stands now perhaps, but if the western world gives them that definition, does that not alienate the moderates? We HAVE to give the moderates a way to be accepted without them having to change the word of god in the face of their conservative enemies. We put the moderates between a rock and a hard place when using terms like Islamo facism. It simply fuels the argument that their conservative enemies make.

The trouble with saying that not everyone who thinks they are Muslim is Muslim is a big one. Largely because the process of converting to Islam is more or less THINKING of yourself as a Muslim and uttering a few words. Labels become very important here. Those who label themselves as Muslims and are in fact "moderate Muslims", not "true" Muslims by your definition become become rather angry when you assault their spiritual identity, as anyone would. And again, alienating the moderates just isn't a good idea. Just gives more credibility to the conservatives. I mean, great, you've made a fine technical point by stating that most who identify themselves as Muslims and Christians are not technically because of their religious texts. But it doesn't accomplish anything. Those religious texts are thousands of years old, and robbing someone of their identity because they don't follow them to a T is just counterproductive.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that some of the core principals of Islam are born of an age where tribal banditry was the norm (and was until very recently). Context in formation of religion is very important. Islam was expansionist not because Mohammed was an evil guy, but because it had to be to survive. Christianity was forgiving because the Jews of the Roman era had already accepted their place as second class citizens (very established second class citizens, but second class none the less), and "turn the other cheek" was a value of the time as tribal warfare was just as big a value in the context of the tribes of the Arabian penninsula.

You remark that Islam is fundamentalism. But really, what religion is this not true of? Those who wish to claim the "true" credentials of ANY religion will always trend towards fundamentalism. This is true both in Saudi Arabia and the United States.

The problem of religion; unlike, say the US constitution, is that the constitution is widely accepted as a "living document". Religious texts simply will never be, because you can't just go ahead and change the "word of god" to fit the times as easily as you can the constitution. Yet, Christians have managed to do this GRADUALLY over time. Not by literally changing the text, but widely accepting that it doesn't need to be followed literally.

You say: "Christianity formed a tradition of splitting into several sects and churches, some branches being not as strict as others, but in islam, this is a big no-no. Muhammad wanted to keep his community (his power basis) together at all cost, and for that totalitarian control and uniformity, no chance for rebellion by threatening apostacy with death (like Mafia does today, for example), it was necessary to rule out any chance to ever leave Islam (muhammad's party) alive, or not to follow the cult completely."

By formed a tradition, you mean experienced several centuries of the worst warfare mankind had seen to that point? It was a pretty big f'in "no-no" for Christians at first as well! I think you take the Christian church splitting into sects and becoming moderate a little lightly. It took a lot! Of time, argument, and blood. This ended with several Christian sects, and even the grandfather sect (Catholicism) was moderated over time. Something that hasn't happned to the Islamic religion for many reasons, not because those that "run" the religion are inherently evil. But because the conditions that surround them have caused them to act inherently evil to survive. As I recall, one of the events that caused such reform in the Catholic church was the Crusades. Young men were being sent to die by religious figures promising them entry into heaven. These Christian religious figures used religion as a mean of politics. Furthering their own causes and that of their allies under the name of god, which is pretty hard to argue with. Eventually, this caused a turning point in the Christian faith. One that lead to moderation and several different sects. I'm not saying that Islam is there now, but I think they're getting to that point. It's hard not to see the parallels unless you are trying not to.

PD

So it says: "Look, we have a freedom of speech. We can insult our own so we have a ticket to insult yours." :shifty:

I yet need to see a drawing of Jesus (gently pushing kid's head downwards toward his groin region after having surreptitiously withdrawn his manhood from his pants) by a Middle Eastern artist.

Have you checked if this pic is not photoshoped? Or you just copy and pasted like a brainless zombie from a bad B-movie? :stare:
I found two versions of one pic, which may have been posted here before.

http://www.net-games.biz/funny-pictu...tures/1465.jpg

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/a...ad768453_1.jpg

I seriously don't think that hating Muslims folks is going to pay anyone's mortgage, solving anyone's personal problems, keeping corrupt politicians from running for elections, corporate scandals and frauds, controlling girlfriends and wives with nagging habbits...:damn:

I did not say "minimum force". I said "as much force as is needed. That is something totally different.

Aha. Well, not with me. I don'T tell everybody he shoudl. attack me, but if he does, I strike back as hard and quick as I can to make the attacker combat-incapable as soon as possible.
Or imagiennthis: Russia not dfeending against germany in WWII. america not fighting agsint Japan after pearl Harbour. Etc etc etc. I fear you are very illusory.

Tolerance must know limits. To tolerate something means to know what is "us". By that standard, "us", you decide what to tolerate, and what not. If you tolerate all and everythinbg, no matter if it is deserved or not, no matter if it valuable or not, no matter if it threatenin you or not, you goive up your own identity, becasue when you tolerate everything, you no longer can make a difference between what is "us" and what is "not us". Also, tolerating what is of bad and evil, is not tolerance, but a crime, and actively supports this evil.

totally the other way around. what you do is decalring the vitim the perpetrator. Not the newspaper cause dtrouble, they practice their freedom of free speech one year ago, and in recent weeks showed their soldiarity to defend this precious value for which our ancestors have fought and suffered miserbaly over decades and centuroies, amongst other freedom for which they payed with blood and life. Who is causing troubles is those you call the redicals. The newspapers are not the probplem. That redi9cals try to inditmadte them silence thewm, make them subjugate to their opinion of what they should be allowed and what not - that is the problem causing troubles.

Islam is not neutral. Islam wants to rule, and wants it all. In no way it is neutral and tolerant. I have explained that often enough now.


Nonsens. If we live in our homes and culture the way we do, this is our right, and shows our cultural identity, our history, the set of values and morals and laws and freedoms that define what we call the West, or our home, our culture. Foreigners coming into our homes, have do adapt to that, or have to lave. And in other countries and cultures, they have to accept that we do not have any oblöigation ro run our home, our culture the way they run theirs. It is not that we have infiltrated for example Pakistani newspapers and made them print these cartoons. It were our newspapers, inside our culture, inside our homes. And they did not any different than ölike they do with events and issues from our own homes and culture. also note, that no other group cocntsnatly, by routine and regularity, causes such troubles, like Idslamic communities, it alsw<ys seems to be them. We have plenty of asian here in Europe, too. koreans - no problem. Chinese, Taiwanese, no problpem. Japanese: no problem. We have South Americans: no problem. north Americans: no problem, and neighbours fromn european countries: no problem. But whenever there is an uproar about the West commanded to chnage and bend accoridng to another culture'S norm and views, you can bet that it is Islam. And that is no generalization, or undiscriminatpory racism. It simply is an empirical truth. But IOslamic foreigners have only rigzht that we shall not interfere witzh their values and habits inside their own home nations where they came from. They do not ujhave any rigzht at all to tell us that we must accept Islam'S views to limit our own habits and freedoms. Again: this is our culture and history, our homes and values, our ethical and philosphical tradition. And Islam has to piss off here when it wants to mess with these. It has no tradition and no rights and no demands to make at all in our Western home culture. And while it nevertheless ripllefires demands and demands at us - it refuses and reciprocity ina cting like it demand sfrom us to act, and rejects most if not all of those rights to foreign cultures and religions in Islamic countries, that it yells to demand for itself here in our western home culture. Cannot become any home hypocritical, and arrogant.

Don't always tell me we have consense, and how much we agree, you and me. we have no consens, and we do not agree at all. ;) No use in trying to ignore that.

They are bdaly drawn, boring, and by far not en par with some other carricatures we usually see in newspapers regarding worl poltics oru own own businesses.
No Islam, is no peaveful "relgion", neitzher is it'S God (a deity that absically is a distortion of the God--concept of abrahamic religion, which was redesigned to fit into Muhammad's agenda. In other words: it is highly opportunistic a concept, and reflects all what is of bad and evil in man'S soul, calling for war, conquest, subjugation, and threatening terrible revenge in case you do question the legitimicy of this concept, or do not obey this God). A friendly God? make a reality check, man.

Again make a reality check. Your cenctp of what Islam is, how frienedly, tolerant and peaceloving, is nonsens. And history proves it wrong as well. Not because Islam was violtated - but becasue it was followed. this is a differtence that hardly can be stressed to often and too much: violence and wars of agression of Christian nations are not becasue Jesus called for it, but took place due to explciit violation of Jresus' message. Conquest and military agression, discirmination and subjugation of ithers in Islam is not in violation of muhammad's will and the Quran - but by following it and being obedient to it. Islam did not only defend against the house of war, as the world of infidels (all world where Islam is not present i the house of war) is called, but in principle makes fighting aginst it aggressively a precodntion for it's concepot of war ever become relaised in some distant future: peace is wehre nothing is left than Islam, deleting anything that is not Islam is bringing peace.

And this ideology first captured the old Roman christian provinces by force and aggression - and then had the nerve to tell Christianity until today that it's efforts to win back what had been lost to Islamic conquest was an agression by Europe! Ha...! Orthodox Islam until today demands to be given bacxk provinces in Spain and Southern Europe! becasue it is islam'S claim that every place that it ever has conqured and put it's foot on shall be it's own until all end of time, and every place that ever was subjugates shall never be given up and shall never be accepted to ebcome non-Islamic again. that is part of Islam'S doctrine.

Not for me. Content that I compare to my knowlege and earlies life experience and my standards decides about what I perceive as right and wrong - neither masses yelling in the street, nor some ideology telling me it demands my culture to obey it's own foreign rules. If numbers where making the difference, then I mist conclude that Hitler was right, because so many jubliated him in the beginning.

I will never understand why some farmer on the other side of the world must think it is his business what people on the other side of the planet are doing in their own home, and how they run their culture. I also will not forget why some peoppe critice so willingly th eoh so hurting offending of islam - but compeltely forgive and ognore the daioly ofgending of Jews in Muslim medias throughout the middle East, the dail hate speeches aginst the West and the the calls for war and murder of christians, and that currently a TV sow in Palestine indoctrinates small children to hate Jews by having a children's magazine with a funny rabbit - which has an exploisve belt aroiund the waste and teaches how wonderful it is to massacre Jews.

well, THAT is offensive, and hurting the human dignity. And it shows why this one cartoon showing Muhammad's head as a bomb is so damn true - becasue Islam really has o much aggressivenbess and violence on it's mind indeed. No other rleigon or poltical ideolgy has caused so many wars and fought so bitterly, like Islam. No other idoelgy ever launched such a long-lasting, successful military conquest, as islam did after muhammad's death. This shoud, be taken into account when making such noise about these cartoons. But they make noise about it, becasue experience tells them that by that they can make wetswrn stepping back another couple of steps - again.

And nor forget that many cartoons showed up in the Eastern nations, that the Danes were accused to have prouced, but instead they havent. many people in the Eats protesting against the csrtoons haven'T seen a single on of them. And other have seen cartoons that never had been drawn, but were created by Islamic hate-prtechers and demagogues who said they brought them from Denmark, but inf act have prudced them themselves to inflame more public riots and aggression of the masses against theWest - to give the west greater trouble.

So when they threaten to burn themselves in protest - I will be the first who will happily hand them the matches. Self-burning is no argument I mjst respect, or even must take note of. It only is one of many illustration how much hysteria and stupidity islam is causing in some people's mind. But agreed, this is the case with fundamentalists of other religions as wel - but that does not make Islam any less dangerous.

Oh damn NO!!!

PD,
I had written a thorough answer, for one hour, adressing all your points and making it a clean and round a package, really. we would have disagreed on some and agreed on other things, but you would have liked it.

And then I hit the amazon-button which is directly placed over the page-menu button where i wanted to paste and copy it all to notepad before posting the file, just in case the text get lost while the forum software is messing up.

It's all lost.

And I am sorry, but after already have written two other longer replies I do not feel like wishing to write it all again. Maybe tomorrow. Sorry.

Scheiße.


when expecting longer writings, I mostly write i Notepad and then insert it here, I rarely forget that and write in the forum window. but when I do forget it, in two of three times something bad happens.

Of course, it never happens with one-liners.

We have all had that happen at one time or another Skybird. But when it happens with longer, carefully prepared posts it is alway frustrating. If you have the time to try and redo your post, I look forward to reading it. :)

PD

Just Google..:roll:
And the Jylland Posten cartoons didnt have one either?:hmm: Though Muhammed was a pedophile, it wasnt normal even in thosedays that you had sex with 7yo children.

No i didint because in the context it doesnt matter, it was humour...:doh:
The brainless Dhimmi is you for defending violonce over cartoons, but you probably would be against Christians rioting. And here is a video from the same demonstration your photoshopped picture came from, and what do they have written in their signs?:roll:
JIHAD AGAINST EUROPEAN CRUSADERS, EUROPE WILL PAY. YOUR ANNIHILATION IS ON ITS WAY., SLAY THOSE WHO INSULT ISLAM etc...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_kyNIevsIs

And the original version is the one that says BEHEAD THOSE WHO INSULT ISLAM. The one saying BEHEAD THOSE WHO SAY ISLAM IS VIOLENT is the photoshopped one, i understand why someone thought it would be funny. Do you feel better now that you know the truth?:p

http://www.net-games.biz/funny-pictu...tures/1465.jpg

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/a...ad768453_1.jpg

It not about hate, its about standing up for our culture, heritage and freedoms.
Some people still give value to these things.

Will do that - but not tonight. ;)

Here we go again :)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23757212/

The movies site.

http://www.fitnathemovie.com/

:doh:

Im really getting angry, though i havent burned anything or threatned to kill anyone.:p

Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West
 

Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West 1-10

Obsession is a film about the threat of Radical Islam to Western civilization. Using unique footage from Arab television, it reveals an 'insiders view' of the hatred the Radicals are teaching, their incitement of global jihad, and their goal of world domination.

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...5A96CBDC2582F7

Thats why you do the long ones on Notepad first and then paste it onto the browser.:smug:

Yes, sure. Read my second last paragraph. I just don'T do it with short answers - or what I initially expect to become not more than short answers.

Well, length is relative... :88)