• 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!

Muslims Have Attacked Europeans for Hundreds of Years

Yes, terrible Muslims, glad the Christian Nations did not practice slavery, oh wait ..............
Wanna talk about Spain's history and who was actually Evil there?

The average American probably thinks the United States invented slavery, and that no slavery has ever existed outside of the US.
I happen to believe that people benefit from knowing history. And yes, that does anger some people.
 
Well there are two problems with that, the EU is not a superstate nor totalitarian. The EU has actually been a champion of human rights and freedoms including privacy rights.

Orwell wouldn't have supported the formulation of the EU.

A principal characteristic of Big Brother in 1984, is the constant surveillance and spying on people. There are so many CCTV cameras in London, that 1 camera exists for every 11 people.

Orwell was highly prophetic.

Whether the EU perfectly embodies one of the 3 super states in 1984 wasn't the point, the point was that the world has moved in the direction of Orwell's novel.

Some globalists in the United States have wanted to merge North America, Central America, and South America into one collective group like the EU. I bet the gullible EU supporters think that's a wonderful idea as well.
 
Actually a lot of them converted for economic reasons, trade with the Islamic empire was big business. Actually the king of the area that is now Mali travelled for pilgrimage to Mecca and on his way caused runaway inflation because of all the gold he spent and gave. Same goes for place like Indonesia and Malaysia.

No comment on Sudan?
 
Orwell wouldn't have supported the formulation of the EU.

A principal characteristic of Big Brother in 1984, is the constant surveillance and spying on people. There are so many CCTV cameras in London, that 1 camera exists for every 11 people.

Orwell was highly prophetic.

Whether the EU perfectly embodies one of the 3 super states in 1984 wasn't the point, the point was that the world has moved in the direction of Orwell's novel.

Some globalists in the United States have wanted to merge North America, Central America, and South America into one collective group like the EU. I bet the gullible EU supporters think that's a wonderful idea as well.

So all security cameras should be banned? They aren't installing the in people's homes they are installing them in public places that could be watched regardless. The kind of surveillance that Orwell was against is the kind that the US is largely responsible for, the NSA type spying. The EU largely protects or at least tries to protect Europeans form that kind of surveillance. The US is a lot closer to the kind of society Orwell was against than the EU ever will be.
 
So all security cameras should be banned? They aren't installing the in people's homes they are installing them in public places that could be watched regardless. The kind of surveillance that Orwell was against is the kind that the US is largely responsible for, the NSA type spying. The EU largely protects or at least tries to protect Europeans form that kind of surveillance. The US is a lot closer to the kind of society Orwell was against than the EU ever will be.

:lamo SUCKER!
 
I would like to point out a correction to the thread, Muslims have been attacking Europe since 710 AD.
The advance into Europe only stopped in 732, when they met the forces of Charles the Hammer Martel.
 
Of course, that does not answer the question I asked. That question was is there a verse in the Bible that says how it is to be interpreted? The Koran has one that demands literal interpretation.

And using Rational Wiki as a source is scraping the bottom of the barrel.

In other words, "I don't like what the source says so I'm going to bitch about it"
 
In other words, "I don't like what the source says so I'm going to bitch about it"

That was an afterthought. There are others who have problems with that source. But again you avoid the question. Why is that?
 
That was an afterthought. There are others who have problems with that source. But again you avoid the question. Why is that?

Cause I don't really feel like digging through the entire friggin bible, or googling it and having to decide which one of the half a dozen sources telling wildly different interpretations is right.
 
So all security cameras should be banned? They aren't installing the in people's homes they are installing them in public places that could be watched regardless. The kind of surveillance that Orwell was against is the kind that the US is largely responsible for, the NSA type spying. The EU largely protects or at least tries to protect Europeans form that kind of surveillance. The US is a lot closer to the kind of society Orwell was against than the EU ever will be.

Actually, you probably already have a camera in your home that has the capability to watch you, if you own a laptop, smartphone, or tablet equipped with a camera.

Google requires its users to accept terms that state that your device can record audio and video of you, without your knowledge or permission, if you use any Google apps. Does that sound like 1984? Hell yeah it does.
 
Actually, you probably already have a camera in your home that has the capability to watch you, if you own a laptop, smartphone, or tablet equipped with a camera.

Google requires its users to accept terms that state that your device can record audio and video of you, without your knowledge or permission, if you use any Google apps. Does that sound like 1984? Hell yeah it does.

Well unless you block it from doing so. I do agree but having things like that must be opt-out is the kind of thing that the EU protects, the EU are very pro-consumer and privacy conscious unlike the US.
 
Nope because that is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

The topic of Arab Muslims owning black slaves in Africa was raised by several people on this thread.
I well understand your reluctance to address Sudan, as it illustrates modern atrocities that Arab Muslims have inflicted on black Christians and animists. You'd rather we focus on what occurred 200-300 years ago than what's occuring now.

I don't understand how anyone can pretend to care about racial disparities in the United States, while not caring about racial disparities that result in genocide in Africa.
 
Cause I don't really feel like digging through the entire friggin bible, or googling it and having to decide which one of the half a dozen sources telling wildly different interpretations is right.

No. Again, I am not asking what the source say is correct. I am looking for a Bible verse that says how Gods word is to be interpreted? The verse in the Koran says that.

Do you see what weight that would carry, in making an argument about what true Islam is about?
 
No. Again, I am not asking what the source say is correct. I am looking for a Bible verse that says how Gods word is to be interpreted? The verse in the Koran says that.

Do you see what weight that would carry, in making an argument about what true Islam is about?

But see, that's a problem right there. Who are you to decide what's "true Islam" and what's not? I'd have the same complaint if somebody was coming in and posting that the creationists are the ones following "true Christianity"

People who take any religious text literally--- the monotheist ones, anyway---have justification for a number of evil things.
 
But see, that's a problem right there. Who are you to decide what's "true Islam" and what's not? I'd have the same complaint if somebody was coming in and posting that the creationists are the ones following "true Christianity"

I am not deciding what true Islam is. Mohammad and his sock puppet Allah did. That is why it is the Koran. The Koran is bound by Allah to be interpreted literally.

And you are refusing to qualify any aid like that in Christianity. Which leaves it open to interpretation.
 
I am not deciding what true Islam is. Mohammad and his sock puppet Allah did. That is why it is the Koran. The Koran is bound by Allah to be interpreted literally.

And you are refusing to qualify any aid like that in Christianity. Which leaves it open to interpretation.

Creationism is True Christianity, it's not open to interpretation, but when the facts prove the religion is horse manure feel free to pick and choose which words of God you now believe
 
Creationism is True Christianity, it's not open to interpretation, but when the facts prove the religion is horse manure feel free to pick and choose which words of God you now believe

I like a lot of what you say. In this case I would like to know how you arrived your claim about true Christianity. My conclusion about true Islam is backed up by the God they believe in. That is why those words are worth picking and choosing.
 
I like a lot of what you say. In this case I would like to know how you arrived your claim about true Christianity. My conclusion about true Islam is backed up by the God they believe in. That is why those words are worth picking and choosing.

Genesis is the word of God written in the Christian Old Testement. You think Christians can just dismiss it because science has proven it wrong? In the New Testiment Jesus himself said the old laws, the word of God is still true and never changing.
 
Last edited:
Genesis is the word of God written in the Christian Old Testement. You think Christians can just dismiss it because science has proven it wrong?
In the New Testiment Jesus himself said the old laws and therefore the word of God is still true and never changing.
The Book of Genesis, in common with all the other books of the canonical Scriptures, was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. “For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:21). “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).
Who Wrote Genesis - Creation Studies Institute
According to this creationist website says " but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost”, That clarifies they are not the direct word of God.

What I said is the Koran contains Allahs actual words. Again that input is undeniable.

Also your quote says nothing about interpretation.
 
Genesis is the word of God written in the Christian Old Testement. You think Christians can just dismiss it because science has proven it wrong?

Who Wrote Genesis - Creation Studies Institute
According to this creationist website says " but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost”, That clarifies they are not the direct word of God.

What I said is the Koran contains Allahs actual words. Again that input is undeniable.

Also your quote says nothing about interpretation.

The "Words of Mohammad" the "Words Allah" written in the Koran were written by man. it's all crap.
 
The "Words of Mohammad" the "Words Allah" written in the Koran were written by man. it's all crap.

It is not to the believers. That is the point. That there is, or there isn't, a God is irrelevant
 
Back
Top Bottom