- Joined
- Mar 7, 2011
- Messages
- 44,814
- Reaction score
- 20,221
- Location
- A very blue state
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
They ARE very 'Christian'. they are fundamentalist extremists, not unlike the Muslim fundamentalist extremists. The big differences of course being 1-They arent beheading people, 2-They dont have liberals tripping over themselves to distance them from Christianity (in fact, usually it is quite the opposite).
In fact it was Christian theology which helped end slavery, but perhaps we should focus on what many Muslims are up to today.At one point in time it was. If you go back 150-200 years, that kind of racist mindset was extremely common in Christianity, much of American slavery was built on Christian theology. Today? Not so much. But then again, we've had the moderating influence of secular society in the west that has largely neutered that kind of religious fanaticism, something the Middle East has yet to experience.
It is 'liberals' who are trying to deflect from the fact that ISL is Islamic by bringing in another religion. Why is that? Is it anther of those 'they all do it' arguments and, if so, what's the point?They have decent people of any poltical stripe trying to distance them from Christianity. Nice try to blame this on liberals, which is kind of like you unfortunately.
Ultimately this all gets reduced down to who is empowered to define something. Do we allow a group of rebels to define themselves and their relationship to a billion other humans or do we retain control over their narrative just as we intend to control peace in the region?this iis just epic fail all over it.
they are islamic because they follow islam. so yes they are an islamic group.
they are not different than the taliban or hamas or any other islamic terrorist group.
they still follow islam.
Oh NIMBY. Dont' be such a drama queen. You don't have to do battle. Live, love and laugh. It's much, much better for you. And besides, ISIS is Islamic in origen - or did you think they got their inspiration from Jerry Falwell?
In fact it was Christian theology which helped end slavery, but perhaps we should focus on what many Muslims are up to today.
Just like the Klu Klux Clan is Christian in origin. Do you think they represent Christians or did they get their inspiration from the Koran?
And what of today? What is it with you people (and by that, I mean blind supporters of Islam being a religion of peace) in needing to dredge up history in order to support your stance. Keep in mind, all you are doing is defeating your own argument. This isn't a question of which religion is better than another, it's about which religion is the greater threat to innocent lives in the world today. By bringing up examples like that, you only show that Christianity has moved passed those stances.
The KKK were not Christian in origin, the were racist in origin.
And it was Christian theology that inspired the Klu Klux clan too.
They were Christian racist in origin.
ISIL is not Islamic in origin they are revolutionaries in origin.The KKK were not Christian in origin, the were racist in origin.
Oh dood...you are so full of **** its scary. Anytime it is convenient, liberals rush to drag them in as an example of 'Christianity'. Every liberal? No. But plenty of them? You bet.They have decent people of any poltical stripe trying to distance them from Christianity. Nice try to blame this on liberals, which is kind of like you unfortunately.
ISIL is not Islamic in origin they are revolutionaries in origin.
But I would argue that there isn't wide-spread support for it. If there was, then ISIS/ISIL wouldn't have to be attacking these Muslim countries, they wouldn't have to be fighting in Syria and Iraq and Iran and the Muslim parts of India. Those countries would simply turn themselves over to ISIS/ISIL control. There is widespread opposition among the Muslim nations against these Islamic extremist groups. However, what makes this different is that these groups have the ability and freedom to act in that part of the world because they have the money and the freedom to act as an Islamic group. There is no secular influence moderating the religious insanity in the Middle East. This kind of thing could never happen in the west.
And no, while I would say that there's something wrong with Islam, just like there's something wrong with every religion, the only one you can blame for the actions of that kid is that kid. There was something seriously wrong with that kid's brain wiring.
ISIL is not Islamic in origin they are revolutionaries in origin.
When I say wide spread support, I'm referring to polls that have consistently showed that the majority are in support of Sharia Law being implemented (or more strictly) or for violent acts against civilian targets. There was an Al Jazeera poll about a year or so ago, where they asked whether they wanted a more secular Sharia Law, and only 33% of those did. The rest, preferred a more violent application of Islam and Sharia Law. Or how about in 2010, when another poll showed that half of Arabs supported Bin Laden. Or just look at the elections that have been had in this countries. Instead of electing moderate, secular governments, they keep electing in religious radicals like in Egypt with the Brotherhood, or in Iraq where they keep electing Maliki. Also, to your point, just because their is violence between muslims, doesn't make them any less dangerous. The whole reason ISIS got a foothold in Iraq, was the ****ty why that the Shia was treating the Sunni. This is why ISIS found such inroads into Iraq, because the Sunnis (of which, ISIS is as well) were sick and tired of being oppressed.
Also, it's not like the MacArthur kids is the first western Muslim to resort to violence against their own country you know? You have the shooter at Ft. Hood for one. The London bombings were carried out by English men.
In fact it was Christian theology which helped end slavery, but perhaps we should focus on what many Muslims are up to today.
No, it was not. But, even if it were, what is your point in deflecting from the topic of "ISIL Is Not Islamic" when it is clear it is? Mohammed was quite clear on the subject.
When I say wide spread support, I'm referring to polls that have consistently showed that the majority are in support of Sharia Law being implemented (or more strictly) or for violent acts against civilian targets. There was an Al Jazeera poll about a year or so ago, where they asked whether they wanted a more secular Sharia Law, and only 33% of those did. The rest, preferred a more violent application of Islam and Sharia Law. Or how about in 2010, when another poll showed that half of Arabs supported Bin Laden. Or just look at the elections that have been had in this countries. Instead of electing moderate, secular governments, they keep electing in religious radicals like in Egypt with the Brotherhood, or in Iraq where they keep electing Maliki. Also, to your point, just because their is violence between muslims, doesn't make them any less dangerous. The whole reason ISIS got a foothold in Iraq, was the ****ty why that the Shia was treating the Sunni. This is why ISIS found such inroads into Iraq, because the Sunnis (of which, ISIS is as well) were sick and tired of being oppressed.
Also, it's not like the MacArthur kids is the first western Muslim to resort to violence against their own country you know? You have the shooter at Ft. Hood for one. The London bombings were carried out by English men.
As distasteful as Westboro has been, So far as I know they have not been accredited
with any beheadings.
Look as a Christian, I am not a big fan of Islam...or Buddhism...or Hinduism. But that is base on their beliefs. But to say that their faith is built on hate is nonsense. Please show me in the Islamic doctrine that they are a religion of hate.
And lets make a few things clear. religion is a man made entity. through out history, wars and movements have been declared in the name of God. Regardless if it is today or 500 years ago, innocent blood has been spilled in the name of Christianity. But the core principle of Christianity is still intact because of our doctrine (the Bible) represent peace.
When you can prove that large numbers of people of Christian faiths support the actions/efforts of the KKK just as large numbers of people of Islamic and Muslim faiths support the actions/efforts of ISIL/ISIS/IS then you might have a point.
Right, and a lot of us are asking the same questions. I think they are afraid and will wait to see what happens before they commit themselves. They will, as bin Laden said, follow the strong horse. Right now that's not us.I've actually made the point that, according to some claims, only 15-20% of Muslims are radicalized. If that's really the case, then why don't the 80-85% of non-radicalized Muslims stand up and stop the crazies?
Yes, that's a very good point. We are being very foolish also in not confronting Islam and not calling out terrorism for what it is. Rather we use euphemisms, like 'workplace violence, or offer excuses such as they were late on their mortgage payments.To some degree, the U.S. has a bit of that responsibility, there are cases where we've actively helped the radicals to stomp on the peaceful demonstrating Muslims, but for the most part, it's because the non-radicals aren't willing to put themselves on the line to fight back. I get it, of course, but I can't help thinking that some part of it is because Islam, as a religion, doesn't allow the non-radicals to take up arms against their radical brethren, the religion gets in the way.
It is a mess but pretending it isn't what it is only makes it messier. What saved Christianity was the New Testement and the teachings of Christ, as well as the Reformation. Islam is still 7th century.I don't know, I just know that it's a mess. And Christian theology fell on both sides of the slavery conflict, proving that the Bible is just the Big Book of Multiple Choice. Anyone can get anything they want out of it by cherry picking. The same is likely true of the Qur'an.
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?