- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 56,981
- Reaction score
- 27,029
- Location
- Chicago Illinois
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Private
I don't dismiss bad behavior. I simply will not accuse all Muslims of being terrorists just because some Muslims are. I do the same for Christians. I don't call all Christians terrorists because some Christians are.
Muslims have been wiping out Coptic Christian Communites that have been around for.....oh like 2-3000 yrs. Couple as recently as last year.
So, now that you can't get me to agree with you, you resort to the Ignorance accusation. Well, I guess if you can't come up with a reasonable response, it makes you feel better to assume you are the expert and I am the lowly ignorant one. What ever floats your boat.
You and Hairytic make it sound as though we're using a single, isolated incident to lambaste an entire group when in reality it has been a roughly daily occurrence for decades spread throughout the world. It's hard to pick up a newspaper with an international section, like The New York Times, and not see stories of suicide bombers, embassy attacks, etc. involving Muslims. The only non-Muslims I have ever really seen in stories like that are drug cartels - which, I assume you also defend.
At some point political correctness has to give way to the reality that Muslims (and the drug cartels) are clearly not behaving like everyone else. That doesn't mean all Muslims (and drug cartel members) are terrorists, murderers, etc. but enough of them are and it is accepted to make it a reasonable characteristic of the group.
The preacher didn't have much support, except in that his free speech rights were defended. As for these radical Christian groups, who are they, and where are they? Certainly, if they exist, they would be making headline news.
This quote from Wikipedia is just the modern day Christian terrorist groups in the US. There is much more information in the link. I suggest you educate yourself a bit on it.
And what has the vast majority response been to Christian radicals, here in the US. Widespread condemnation.
We don't try to excuse their behavior because of their religious beliefs. We judge them based on their actions.
And what has the vast majority response been to Christian radicals, here in the US. Widespread condemnation.
We don't try to excuse their behavior because of their religious beliefs. We judge them based on their actions.
Who is accusing All Muslims of being Terrorists? Are you playing with terminology now? First you said radicals. Now you say terrorists. What is the explanation as to attack Buddhist Monks and Burn down their temples and their homes. Uhm These arent Westerners now.....are they?
But those of us with cool heads and rational minds are able to see that the Islamic faih itself is not to blame. How is it you and people who think like you cannot see that? Does the hate and anger blind you to that simple, reasonable fact?
Yes, we can see that the faith itself is not to blame, but we can also see that there is a hesitation to address violence which arises from Islam, because we are afraid of offending Muslims. That is the point, which has nothing to do with hate and anger.
Well FIRST lets look at your current grasp of History shall we? Christianity being the older of the 2 religions has only been around 2000 years and in it's modern incarnation ony about 1000. Islam and Muslims didn't come into being as a religion until the 7th Century C.E. so your premise of Muslims Killing Coptic Christians for 2-3000 years is false. And COPTIC Christianity hasn't been around as the basic faith so that is false premise #2. But as to your basic thought process it was CHRISTIANS who first began to wage war on ISLAM starting in 1118 with Richard the Lion Hearted and his Crusades, which by the way there have been 13 which covered a time span of more than 500 years and ranged from the Northern African Nations all the way to Turkey. So if you are going to be pointing fingers at who's been killing whom and who started it learn history first and then look at how many fingers point backward as you point 1 forward.
It takes FAR more courage to stand up and say enough is enough and to lay your anger and hatred aside than it does to pick up a weapon and kill someone simply because they differ in belief or faith than you.
Hardly. The supposed "hesitation of Muslims" to condemn these attacks is a myth, and an absurd slander against Muims generally without an ounce of truth to it.
The myth does provide nice cover for intolerance, apparently, but it holds no water with any reasonable person.
Au contraire. It is the coward that gives in to the anger and lashes out. It takes true courage when your enemy has slapped your cheek to turn the other cheek.Then I would say that there are some radical Islamists who need to heed your word, and stop killing in the name of the Allah. I have no hate and anger, but if someone tries to kill me because they don't agree with my religion, you can bet your ass, they will not a find a pacifist here, but rather someone who is willing to defend my own life. It takes more courage to fight, than to be pacifist and run the other way.
I suggest you educate yourself a bit on it.
My irony meter was ringing off the hook, so I had to investigate the source.
How cute that a girl who states she doesn't want to know anything about Muslims lectures a woman to educate herself.........
Strawman. NOBODY is excusing terrorism. EVERYBODY is condemning terrorism.I'm not talking about hesitation of Muslims. You can play-pretend that you are among the reasonable all you want, and you are free to believe what you want, but one of the issues we've been discussing is whether or not WE are inclined toward excusing terrorist actions, based on our fear of offending Muslims, and that does seem to be the case. There is plenty of evidence of it in this very thread.
It takes true courage when your enemy has slapped your cheek to turn the other cheek.
Au contraire. It is the coward that gives in to the anger and lashes out. It takes true courage when your enemy has slapped your cheek to turn the other cheek.
Ummm, that is Jesus' doctrine there.
Mohammad's involved instruction on how to decapitate.
But, hey -- they are both the same as we have predetermined so as to advance our agenda, right?
Au contraire. It is the coward that gives in to the anger and lashes out. It takes true courage when your enemy has slapped your cheek to turn the other cheek.
No. That is what we call martyrdom. If you desire to martyr yourself, feel free. I prefer to use my instincts to preserve my life.
Strawman. NOBODY is excusing terrorism. EVERYBODY is condemning terrorism.
All I see on the other side is a bunch of Islamphobic reactionaries looking for an excuse to use isolated instances of violent crime to tar the entire Islamic faith. Sad.
As to who's teaching? A Pacifist? Hows that work when ya watch one lash out in anger except that slap comes in the form a sword and you see one get their head lopped off.
I'll bet money you wont turn to the other cheek?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?