• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Muslim peace conference condems terrorism

I'm loosing money today. I bet someone that you couldn't possibly be more of a pompous donkey than you were already. Boy, was I wrong. You're even dumber than you think I think you are.

Was this right before the bell rang for recess?
 
lSex, drugs, and rock and roll have been American mainstream for decades. Haight-Ashbury proved unsustainable.
[h=1][/h]
More foreign observations on America, coming from a foreigner in a foreign land. Very enlightening.
 
These days it takes about a generation for immigrants to loose most of their cultural identity. I know plenty of so called Muslims, they never pray, they never attend Mosque, they drink like fish, they live like most Americans.

So all Muslims are drunks.
 
The golden rule came from Confucius! It's not the only thing christians copied, considering the amount of virgin births before Christs.

Either Jesus Christ figured it our for himself or adopted it from the teachings of Confucius. . Does it really matter?

HE also had many other ideas, such as poor people be equal in the eyes of God, which still reverberate around the world.

I strongly disagree with your notion about the lack of substance, especially considering the 'substance' it has to compete with. The most importance difference is the lack of dogma, aka the word of God. As a secular humanist, there's no excuse, I always have to develop my knowledge, it's not static. Morality also changes, just read the bible and see how much they've changed in 2000 years. There's simply nothing that beats secular humanism with regard to morality. That's its strenght, its laws apply always and everywhere.

The 'lack of dogma', the willingness to change your morals according to the fashions of the day, shows SH doesn't really stand for anything. If you read the New Testament you will see ideas which are timeless and how they still inspire and serve people to this day. It truly revolutionized the world, and is still doing so. How can SH ever do that when there are no real beliefs?

It seems to me that SH allows people to feel good about themselves without ever committing to any personal sacrifices or promises. While it's far easier than any religion its lack of any real long term substance pretty much dooms it to remain on the sidelines.
 
You can't really be this dense; it doesn't seem possible.

I'll explain.

Whenever a there is an act of terrorism committed by a Muslim we are reminded that others commit terrorism as well, or that "Not all Muslims are terrorists", or "Are you saying that all Muslims are terrorists?"

Therefore, by your claim that you have Muslim friends who are drunks, I was responding in a like manner.

In other words it was 'irony'.

It's often a waste of time on these boards and no fun having to explain it..
 
Either Jesus Christ figured it our for himself or adopted it from the teachings of Confucius. . Does it really matter?
Compared to the rule, no.

HE also had many other ideas, such as poor people be equal in the eyes of God, which still reverberate around the world.

The 'lack of dogma', the willingness to change your morals according to the fashions of the day, shows SH doesn't really stand for anything. If you read the New Testament you will see ideas which are timeless and how they still inspire and serve people to this day. It truly revolutionized the world, and is still doing so. How can SH ever do that when there are no real beliefs?
No. Morals change. You translate that into " the willingness to change your morals according to the fashions of the day". You shouldn't.

Considering the OT versus the NT, God seems to have changed as well. I've read the bible countless times, know some parts by heart. In my view the text in itself is not remotely as inspiring as e.g., the teachings of Mencius. The beauty of those is I don't have to believe in fairy tales. It's rational and truly timeless.

As for no real beliefs, study humanism and I'm sure some of your beliefs are likely to change. But it never ends, you can't excuse yourself from the batlle of ideas and critical thought. Your death will mark the ending of your journey, but the quest (what is right, good, beautiful, just, noble, pure etc etc) always contineus.

It seems to me that SH allows people to feel good about themselves without ever committing to any personal sacrifices or promises. While it's far easier than any religion its lack of any real long term substance pretty much dooms it to remain on the sidelines.
I wouldn't be to sure about that. I don't need a religion to try and be a good person. It's just that when I fail, there's no redemption, I have to deal with my conscience.
 
Last edited:
As if further demonstration of your endowment were necessary.

Thank you for taking such a keen interest in my endowment, young fella, but I don't believe I am at liberty to discuss such matters with you quite yet.

Perhaps some time after your birthday in 2013 we could resume this part of the conversation.
 
Thank you for taking such a keen interest in my endowment, young fella, but I don't believe I am at liberty to discuss such matters with you quite yet.

Perhaps some time after your birthday in 2013 we could resume this part of the conversation.

Sad. Probably your best shot too.
I wouldn't care to speculate about your manhood or lack thereof as the case may be. But since you bring it up, if I had to guess, I'd say your manhood is probably about as impressive as your other endowments.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Ummm, let's get back on topic, mmmkay...
 
Are you referring here to the typical simple-mindedness of Paul or the typically simple-minded response of Santorum?

It's like watching two people arguing over whether or not something is a fish with one of them arguing "look, it has scales so it must be a fish", with the other arguing "No, it swims, therefore it is a fish", each oblivious to the fact they are both correct and each oblivious to the fact that neither determinant is enough to establish that it is, indeed, a fish.

We are hated for who we are. Only idiots deny that. We are hated for what we do. Only idiots deny that as well. All a person has to do is read Bin Laden's letters to America where he spells out the typical laundry list of hackneyed grievances, which include attacks against both who we are and against what we do. Just because some narrow minded ideologue tries to ignore one or the other because he is too dogmatic to look at all the reasons, and trying to make political hay out of he ones he does select, that does not mean the other reasons are invalid.

You called the tune, now you don't like the sound of it. Big surprise.
 
You called the tune, now you don't like the sound of it. Big surprise.

Actually, it was the Islmists who called the tune. I am simply acknowledging all the themes of such a tune rather than limiting myself to one while excluding another.
 
Perhaps they should reconvene this Peace Conference in light of what Iran's been up to recently.
 
Back
Top Bottom