• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Separating Islam from "All Muslims".

Re: Separating Islam from "All Muslims".

Wait...I just wanna know - are you living under a bridge? Or, if you're a gamer, perhaps up in the mountains along the path to High Hrothgar?
Bit of everything, laddie ;)
 
Re: Separating Islam from "All Muslims".

Hey mbig.

Just so I don't respond to anything of yours by mistake again, I've blanked you.

I still get notifications when you quote me though, just that your posts no longer show.

Thought I'd let you know so you don't go to unnecessary trouble in future.
 
Re: Separating Islam from "All Muslims".

Lol, "ran off". More like, "I have responsibilities I need to attend to".
I'm so sorry I didn't keep you at the back of my mind every single second that I was gone.

Well not just Christianity is a bad religion in my eyes, ALL religion is bad for society and is overall, complete bull****.

The Bible is filled with horrible, terrible morality, as it has numerous verses supporting slavery (and even instructions for slave masters), misogyny, bizarre death penalties, denigration of handicapped people, barbarism, child molestation (when Moses commanded his army to take the virgin young girls for themselves), and many more horrible messages that I could go on and on about till the end of time.

And another funny thing that the Bible shows is that God is actually worse than the Devil. He acts as this very narcissistic dictator, with a borderline personality disorder. God also contradicts himself constantly when he expresses his undying love and kindness, but then commands his own minions to do his dirty work to commit brutal atrocities, and even commit GLOBAL GENOCIDE. The only thing Satan has done is just simply try to convince people to disobey the edicts of God, which I would most certainly agree with Satan with if he was actually real.

When I see new atheists writing things like this I ask myself how they can be so ignorant. Are they ignorant of the millions upon millions of people who call themselves Christians, participate in Christian fellowship, and attest to the benefits that they receive from this? Surely they can't claim to be ignorant of that. The same goes for most other major religions, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, and on and on. If religions are so bad then how do these wet-behind-the-ears atheists account for these facts?

Surely they cannot be ignorant of the fact that the vast majority of people who are believers of a major religion participate in that religion and are at the same time peaceful members of the larger society and able to work in any field of endeavor productively and usefully. Certainly, individuals and groups have used their religion to justify violence, even murderous violence, against others, but these are a tiny minority compared to the body of believers who think that their religion calls them to peace and tolerance. These bad actors are not accepted or condoned by the vast majority of Christians.

Meanwhile, the new atheists forever struggle to separate themselves from the actions of some of the officially atheistic nation states that killed millions of their own citizens in the name of leftist ideologies. It has been hundreds and hundreds of years since Christian dogma was officially used by the state to justify mass murder. Officially atheistic states all over the world justified state sponsored mass murder on a gargantuan scale on the basis of their ideology in the last century.
 
Chagos said:
Oh, ask and you shall be answered.
For example Steve Canuck.
Who by his own account has barely scratched the complexities of a religion but holds himself to be an authority on it by having been in contact with 3 to 4 of its practitioners at Imam level (whatever that is supposed to be) and has read its holy book.
That's it? Not only have you supplied Not a single Rebuttal, but you seem so damned proud of it. That was 100% ad hominem. You're starting to look very foolish.
And that's what Chagos continues to do BOARD-WIDE.
Peanut Gallery harassment of anything that offends his sensibilities.
Of course, Links/citations counter to the ones We DO take the trouble to put up, are also are an anathema to him.
The last 10 pages here, at least, are mainly garbage harassment/baiting/string-effing by Chagos et al, not debate.

He has now said he's putting me on ignore because he [again] 'recognizes my format'.
This is Another Lie.
He surely 'recognized my format' after my long Pew Poll post, but Responded/TROLLED Twice after anyway.
The FACT is he could not deal with the cited Content, so trolled, then got called on that too. Now, no option but defensive/'ignore', because I cut off his last avenue: Trolling.
Factual debate was Never in his repertoire, just harassment.
 
Last edited:
It's not a matter of fake vs. real. There are degrees of devotion, and the likes of ISIS have taken it to the nth.

:lol: That's why Isis is classified as radical. There are radicals of all faiths.

Your underlying argument seems to be that Isis shouldn't be called radicals. They should be thought of as representing the truth of Islam.
 
:lol: That's why Isis is classified as radical. There are radicals of all faiths.

Your underlying argument seems to be that Isis shouldn't be called radicals. They should be thought of as representing the truth of Islam.
What's a 'Radical' in Islam?
ISIS certainly is: even the Taliban hate them.
Are the Taliban 'Radical'?
Is the Muslim Brotherhood 'Radical'?
Is wanting Death by Stoning for Adulterers, Apostates, or Homosexuals, 'Radical'?
We're getting up there now!
See my Pew Poll numbers a few pages back.

In a few words..
A Christian Fundamentalist is a Missionary, a Muslim Fundamentalist Kills him.
 
Last edited:
:lol: That's why Isis is classified as radical. There are radicals of all faiths.

Your underlying argument seems to be that Isis shouldn't be called radicals. They should be thought of as representing the truth of Islam.

It depends on your definition of "radical". Some people use it define one who has distorted doctrine to make it mean something else. Others use it to describe those who devote every waking minute trying to adhere to their religion's principles. The ugly truth is that when ISIS claims their actions can be supported by the Qur'an, hadiths, and actions of Mohamed, they provide the necessary proof. My Islam and Rape thread is an example.
 
What's a 'Radical' in Islam?
ISIS certainly is: even the Taliban hate them.
Are the Taliban 'Radical'?
Is the Muslim Brotherhood 'Radical'?
Is wanting Death by Stoning for Adulterers, Apostates, or Homosexuals, 'Radical'?
We're getting up there now!
See my Pew Poll numbers a few pages back.

In a few words..
A Christian Fundamentalist is a Missionary, a Muslim Fundamentalist Kills him.
Just as Communism has been described as Socialism in a hurry, so ISIS can be called al Qaeda in a hurry. Both want a caliphate but their means of getting there are slightly different.

In fact they are both more closely aligned strategically than they pretend, each playing the bad cop/worse cop roles. Their shared commonality is that they are all ignorant savages.

Why Al Qaeda thinks ISIS has no future - CSMonitor.com
 
Back
Top Bottom