Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion : According to you, yes. That's why what you're saying is so typically stupid. Sorry, but your attempt at shifting the goalposts isn't flying. If Islam is evil, then Christianity is a 100 times worse. Of course, it could be that your attempt to indict 1.5 billion people for Al Queda's actions is simply false, and dispicable.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]


    Shifting goal posts.  Right.  This from the person who is using events from 1,900 years ago to justify the current Islamite extremism movement.  Goal posts, phuh, we don't need no stinkin' goal posts.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion : That a religion excuses/justifies murder  in its cause says soemthing negative about that religion. Except when it's Christianity. We realized that particular religion wiped out countless individuals in the name of the churhc, and in the name of state conquest approved of by the Christian God (for two examples, America's "Manifest Destiny" and the "conversion" of Africans during British colonialism). To avoid the problem that our anti-muslim argument works even better as an anti-christian argument, we simply move the goal posts. We ignore any periods from history, say, 1900 years or so of it, in which Christianity did just that. However, we still want to justify our bigotry towards muslims, so we invent an arbitrary percentage and say that percentage of the world's 1.5 billion muslims are terrorists or honor killers. Then, we can say Islam is evil while excusing Christianity for far more, and worse, behavior. Gotcha. Perfectly objective and reasonable argument.....
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    I'm not excusing any religion. I am saying that the judeo christian religion has evolved and does not condone illegal and violent acts.

    Islam for the most part still embraces sharia law which puts severe restrictions on human rights especially women. Condones wife beating and other acts of violence including murder if the offense is considered blasphemous towards the prophet Mohammad!
     
    Do you dispute this?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]In either case, we are talking about indicting a whole bunch of other people for a smaller group of peoples' bad acts. Limiting consideratino of said smaller group's bad acts to a specific time range is transparent: It reveals the speaker's realization that it is beyond stupid to indict 1.5 billion people for Al Queda's actions (or any other bad acts for that matter). Either Christianity and Islam are both evil, for the reason that a smaller group of individuals committed evil in its name and/or were excused by the religion... ....or indicting an entire group of people based on the bad acts of a few is incredibly stupid, dare I say bigotted.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    You are acting obtuse for a reason I presume.

    I never said indict 1.5 billion people! I said maybe 10% of all islam is radical and I will add that the elders or imams while not condoning violent jihad still adhere and support to varying degrees Sharia law and it's abusive practices toward human rights and women!!

    Do you dispute this is true??
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion : Skeeter, I told you about drinking fifths of whiskey before posting on BDC: Don't do it. You end up completely misreading what people are saying.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    Sure.  Al Gore invented Syria.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion : I know, but skeeter did. This is all related to skeeter's statement that if a religion condones, excuses, or is used to excuse killign, that "says somethign" about the religion. That either applies to all religions, or none. As for 10%, you just made that up. I cannot go there. All I can say is that if a good number of muslims excuse evil by pretending that's what Islam demands, that reflects poorly on that group of muslims. Not on all muslims. Temporal games are a distraction, and if anything, forgiving Christianity because the last 100 years went more smoothly in fact helps prove my point.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    Why must it apply to all religions?

    Let me ask you a question:  How did Mohammed implement the spread of Islam?  Was it a peaceful movement, or one of conquering and forced conversion?

    Now, let me ask you:  Christianity:  How did Jesus implement the spread of Christianity?  Was it a movement of peace, or one of conquering and forced conversion?

    Or, is the inconvenient truth of this require the "moving the goal posts" screed?
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]The latter, as you know perfectly well. Jesus's followers spread Christianty by the conquest of the Roman empire against the Pagans (who for their own part managed a cool 300 years of persecution of Christians), and then, bloody conquests throughout the world. Africa, South America, North America, etc., all of these were conquests in the name of the Christian God. We even saw the God-derived notion of "manifest destiny" being used to excuse killing/removing American Indians just over a hundred years ago. Then of course you had discrete events like the tortures of the inquisition, the slaughter of the crusades, etc. Every continent is stained with blood spilt in the name of the Christian God.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    All true however the warring was in part due to land acquisition, control of trade routes, dynasty changes, etc.) that could call into question the true reasons behind the conflict. Religious temples and such were destroyed in part to demoralize the opposition.

    So, are you saying that because Christians did some horrific things a few centuries ago they have no right to speak out against radical islam now?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion : All true however the warring was in part due to land acquisition, control of trade routes, dynasty changes, etc.) that could call into question the true reasons behind the conflict. Religious temples and such were destroyed in part to demoralize the opposition. So, are you saying that because Christians did some horrific things a few centuries ago they have no right to speak out against radical islam now?

    BTW: Radical to me is anyone who thinks oppressing the basic human rights of others because of gender or race is their right!

    Posted by sk8ter2008[/QUOTE]
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]The latter, as you know perfectly well. Jesus's followers spread Christianty by the conquest of the Roman empire against the Pagans (who for their own part managed a cool 300 years of persecution of Christians), and then, bloody conquests throughout the world. Africa, South America, North America, etc., all of these were conquests in the name of the Christian God. We even saw the God-derived notion of "manifest destiny" being used to excuse killing/removing American Indians just over a hundred years ago. Then of course you had discrete events like the tortures of the inquisition, the slaughter of the crusades, etc. Every continent is stained with blood spilt in the name of the Christian God.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    Really?   I think you are gravely mistaken.  Christianity was spread through the by a peaceful process, starting with Peter and Paul.  This peaceful process has continued to this day. 
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]Which was all done in the name of God, who smiled on the sovereign who ordered the ravaging be done in the name of God. If your resposne to that is "well, that's not really something Christianity would have urged or approved," then you are more or less saying that my position is 100% correct. Evil fundamentalists invoke the name of Allah to commit evil, and one can always "call into question the true reasons." It makes no sense to excuse murder in the name of the Christian God but condemn murder in the name of the Muslim God. Don't twist my words. Skeeter said that if a religion is used to excuse killing, that says something about the religion. My responsive position indicates one of two things is true: 1. Christianity is also evil, perhaps a lot more given the volume of blood; or 2. Skeeter was completely wrong. I am not personally saying anything about Christianity. I am proving skeeter wrong. Simple.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    No, you are not.  you are twisting my words, and saying things I did not say.  It is because you refuse to think critically about this subject.  You simply won't. 

    But, how better to judge a religion than by its founder?

    Consider this:

    Mohammed was a warrior.  He led 8 military campaigns in his effort to convert and killed thousands.

    Jesus led 12 men towards and understanding of Peace, and harmed no one, compelled no one to convert.

    Mohammed's disciples killed for their faith.

    Christ's followers were killed for their faith.

    Mohammed persecuted the infidels.

    Christ forgave those who persecuted him.

    Can you not see the difference?  I implore you to read the bible and learn more about the peace that passes all understanding.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from sk8ter2008. Show sk8ter2008's posts

    Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion

    In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Syria reportedly may be preparing to use chemical weapons against rebellion : However, his followers spent the vast majority of the next Two Thousand torturing, slaughtering, and burning (1) in the name of punishing heretics who refused to accept Christianity, and (2) in the name of conquests, which were explicitly justified as God's will to spread the Christian faith. God that was easy. Yet another appropriate use of the L word coming up: In Response to Re: Liberal Media Never Mentions Terrorist's Religion : Can you say "Roman Catholic Church" Can you say "Church of England"? Please don't tell me you're hanging your hat on some bizzaro distinction between an "honor killing" and any other killing in the name of / excused by religion.
    Posted by WhatDoYouWantNow[/QUOTE]

    So, they (early romans and CoE) used religion to justify horrid acts but, does it fit with the initial teachings? In this case no, jesus taught peace love and truth.

    Mohammad was a warrior and conqueror so, you can say his followers while no more extreme and vile than those that used Jesus teachings but, they were actually following his actions while the romans and COE were not following the Christian teachings?
     
  12. This post has been removed.

     

Share