"Muslims must be held responsible for France terror attacks"

[gnostic]

Rupert Murdoch is ***hole. (There is no foot-in-mouth smiley. I still find the new smilies to be lame)

I have never like him, and nothing that he has to say is worth my time.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well, I can't really agree, simply based on the emotional impact their protests have on people I know, personally.

Without dismissing that impact, I don't see how it can be greater than the impact of, say, "sidewalk counselling" outside an abortion clinic or "pray the gay away" groups

Honestly, I think we have different standards of "extremism". I do appreciate you questioning my application of "extremism" to them, seeing as they're nonviolent and comparatively tame next to other extremists, and I don't want to throw the term around needlessly. But in this case, I do stand by it.

If the WBC is our standard for extremism, then most mainstream religions are "extremist".

 

[Harikrish]

Don't tell me what not to do and I won't have to kick the prophet in the arse!

You are wagging your tongue and attacking the prophet without anyone telling you to do it. Why you find it in you to hate and insult the prophet loved by 1.6 billion Muslims shows how disproportionate your hatred is towards Islam a religion of peace.
Even though there are 164 jihad verses to deal with infidels like you. Islam is a religion of peace. Peace be with you. The virgins can wait.

 

[Riverwolf]

Without dismissing that impact, I don't see how it can be greater than the impact of, say, "sidewalk counselling" outside an abortion clinic or "pray the gay away" groups

Emotional reactions rarely have anything to do with rationality, and humans as a species are emotional first, rational second. It's impossible to "see" how, for that reason, without direct experience.

If the WBC is our standard for extremism, then most mainstream religions are "extremist".

Not really, at least applied to Western Christianity (at least in the area I'm in).

Extremism is relative to the environment and association. WBC might be par for the course in the Bible Belt, but they're not here.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Very good post! But we cannot lose sight that, right or wrong, the quran IS being used to justify these action. Part of the confusion for westerners, I believe, is that we here the quran can't be used to justify such things, but we see that it is.

The facts contradict the claims.

This is important, do you agree? That to increase understanding, we must increase examination. I have heard many muslims say 'this is not islam' and I have heard many muslims say 'this is islam.'

I have seen that this is islam, at least it is the islam of some.

I would prefer to examine, and yes that means questioning and even finding fault, the parts of islam that DO justify this violence.

Thank you.

Well, there are two possibilities; this is Islam and this is not Islam. By logic and common sense, both of them cannot coexist. One of these possibilities at least must be real regardless to justifications we make.

I don't mind friendly criticism, but I happened to be one of those saying that it is not Islam because of two rules I believe in, which makes me willing to discuss and give my opinion; one is that verses that imply seriousness and might sound violent are there for specific conditions in times/situations there is a threat to Islam and Muslims (specifics), and the other rule is that no verse gives an absolute course of action to be always done (control). Verses that some might see contradict with each other, I say they don't, and there is always an overlapping area in them that render them both valid and can coexist.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Thank you.

Well, there are two possibilities; this is Islam and this is not Islam. By logic and common sense, both of them cannot coexist. One of these possibilities at least must be real regardless to justifications we make.

I don't mind friendly criticism, but I happened to be one of those saying that it is not Islam because of two rules I believe in, which makes me willing to discuss and give my opinion; one is that verses that imply seriousness and might sound violent are there for specific conditions in times/situations there is a threat to Islam and Muslims (specifics), and the other rule is that no verse gives an absolute course of action to be always done (control). Verses that some might see contradict with each other, I say they don't, and there is always an overlapping area in them that render them both valid and can coexist.

If all religious persons used their hearts and minds to frame their scriptures, it would be a better world than the one in which religious persons use their scriptures to frame their hearts and minds.

If this is true, then the truth is within us, not within the scriptures. The scriptures are only as good as the person reading them.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

You are wagging your tongue and attacking the prophet without anyone telling you to do it.

Quit true. I do not need your permission. But consider, I attack the prophet, because you use his name to order me around. You are responsible for my insolence!

Why you find it in you to hate and insult the prophet loved by 1.6 billion Muslims shows how disproportionate your hatred is towards Islam a religion of peace.

You obviously have not read my many rips on christians. My anger I admit, but it is not hatred of 1.6 million muslims, or the prophet. It is anger toward IDIOTS that speak in the name of the prophet without the capability of understanding what they say.

Even though there are 164 jihad verses to deal with infidels like you. Islam is a religion of peace. Peace be with you. The virgins can wait.

LOL. Again, though you and I are adversaries, I find myself liking some part of you. Peace to you.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Not really, at least applied to Western Christianity (at least in the area I'm in).

Extremism is relative to the environment and association. WBC might be par for the course in the Bible Belt, but they're not here.

I wasn't thinking of the Bible Belt; I was thinking of places like here (Ontario, which is basically a godless wasteland by American standards), where the Catholic Church has been fighting GSAs in schools, or Rhode Island, where Jessica Ahlquist, for the "sin" of asking that a prayer banner be removed from her public high school, got death threats from Christians to the point where she had to get a police escort to school. She got called an "evil little thing" by her state representative... who afterward won his Democratic primary and ran unopposed for his seat.

That's the sort of environment I'm talking about. Nobody has ever had to wear a bulletproof vest for fear of the Westboro Baptist Church. People HAVE had to wear bulletproof vests for fear of "mainstream" Catholic and Baptist churches... and not just in the Bible Belt.

 

[Harikrish]

If all religious persons used their hearts and minds to frame their scriptures, it would be a better world than the one in which religious persons use their scriptures to frame their hearts and minds.

If this is true, then the truth is within us, not within the scriptures. The scriptures are only as good as the person reading them.

We have just witnessed what the magazine created using only their hearts and minds. They mocked and insulted the prophet loved by 1.6 billion Muslims with total disregard for their scriptures.
If they let scriptures guide them instead of listening to their hating hearts and evil minds, the outcome would have been different.
Not only does your loose tongue wag too much, but your backside does all the thinking. There are 164 jihad verses to deal with infidels like you

 

[Harikrish]

Quit true. I do not need your permission. But consider, I attack the prophet, because you use his name to order me around. You are responsible for my insolence!You obviously have not read my many rips on christians. My anger I admit, but it is not hatred of 1.6 million muslims, or the prophet. It is anger toward IDIOTS that speak in the name of the prophet without the capability of understanding what they say.LOL. Again, though you and I are adversaries, I find myself liking some part of you. Peace to you.

The mention of virgins always brings compromise from infidels. But they are only promised to Muslims. Please continue your hating.

 

[Riverwolf]

I wasn't thinking of the Bible Belt; I was thinking of places like here (Ontario, which is basically a godless wasteland by American standards), where the Catholic Church has been fighting GSAs in schools, or Rhode Island, where Jessica Ahlquist, for the "sin" of asking that a prayer banner be removed from her public high school, got death threats from Christians to the point where she had to get a police escort to school. She got called an "evil little thing" by her state representative... who afterward won his Democratic primary and ran unopposed for his seat.

That's the sort of environment I'm talking about. Nobody has ever had to wear a bulletproof vest for fear of the Westboro Baptist Church. People HAVE had to wear bulletproof vests for fear of "mainstream" Catholic and Baptist churches... and not just in the Bible Belt.

Fair enough. That sort of thing is foreign to me; so long as one stays out of North Richmond and certain parts of Oakland, folks in my area don't really have to worry about wearing bulletproof vests. Compared to the Christianity of my area, WBC is very extreme.

But yes, they're not extreme, but perhaps just overly rude and annoying, compared to those which actually are a legitimate threat.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

The mention of virgins always brings compromise from infidels. But they are only promised to Muslims. Please continue your hating.

LOL, it wasn't the mention of virgins. Laughter makes me feel good and you make me laugh. Please continue with your comedy.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Fair enough. That sort of thing is foreign to me; so long as one stays out of North Richmond and certain parts of Oakland, folks in my area don't really have to worry about wearing bulletproof vests. Compared to the Christianity of my area, WBC is very extreme.

But yes, they're not extreme, but perhaps just overly rude and annoying, compared to those which actually are a legitimate threat.

Depending on how narrowly you define "your area" (i.e. whether you're talking all of California or just the Bay Area), the mainstream Christianity of your area is working very hard to kill gay Ugandans.

Rewriting the anti-gay history of Rick Warren in Uganda | 76 CRIMES

 

[Riverwolf]

Depending on how narrowly you define "your area" (i.e. whether you're talking all of California or just the Bay Area), the mainstream Christianity of your area is working very hard to kill gay Ugandans.

Rewriting the anti-gay history of Rick Warren in Uganda | 76 CRIMES

"My area" pretty much refers just to the SF Bay Area, particularly Diablo Valley and surrounding areas. Mainstream Christianity here is very supportive of LGBT+ rights; non-support is very much a niche.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

We have just witnessed what the magazine created using only their hearts and minds. They mocked and insulted the prophet loved by 1.6 billion Muslims with total disregard for their scriptures.
If they let scriptures guide them instead of listening to their hating hearts and evil minds, the outcome would have been different.
Not only does your loose tongue wag too much, but your backside does all the thinking. There are 164 jihad verses to deal with infidels like you

At least you admit your heart and mind are no good and that you can't make a decision for yourself without that ancient rag you call a book. Recognizing the issue is the first step. Now if you can just recognize that this is the problem, you will be on your way to truth.

 

[Smart_Guy]

If all religious persons used their hearts and minds to frame their scriptures, it would be a better world than the one in which religious persons use their scriptures to frame their hearts and minds.

If this is true, then the truth is within us, not within the scriptures. The scriptures are only as good as the person reading them.

I agree.

I also wish those bashing religion realize this point and be fair and respectful in their criticism.

 

[Looncall]

We have just witnessed what the magazine created using only their hearts and minds. They mocked and insulted the prophet loved by 1.6 billion Muslims with total disregard for their scriptures.
If they let scriptures guide them instead of listening to their hating hearts and evil minds, the outcome would have been different.
Not only does your loose tongue wag too much, but your backside does all the thinking. There are 164 jihad verses to deal with infidels like you

The 1.6 million need to grow up and realize that their superstitious taboos do not apply to other people.

If islam is noxious, as many find it to be, the number of its followers is irrelevant to whether it should be opposed.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

I agree.

I also wish those bashing religion realize this point and be fair and respectful in their destructive criticism.

It can be difficult, intellectually and emotionally, to differentiate between the two. I admit my comments aimed at the later can be very offensive toward the former.

 

[Cephus]

IF it's true Islam teaching hate against non-Muslims , then Why all Muslims don't adopt this , and staring killing innocent non-Mulsims around the world ?

Because there's no such thing as "true Islam". Every Muslim has a slightly different reading and interpretation of the Qur'an, just like every Christian has a slightly different reading and interpretation of the Bible. There is no single, demonstrable "right way" to read any of these books because that's all they are. Books. So long as people are holding these books up as the guide to living life, there will be as many bad readings as there are good readings.

 

[Cephus]

I would much rather that Muslims try to weed out the extremists. If they don't the western powers try to do it and that gets very messy and often makes things worse.

That's something I've said time and time again, but not just for Muslims but for all religions. These extremists don't just magically appear out of the woodwork. When we see violence, particularly in secular parts of the world, invariably we find that these people were part of the regular religious community and everyone knew they were crazy and unstable, but nobody ever did anything about it. They didn't go to the authorities and report them, they rarely ever throw them out of their religious gatherings, they simply let them go crazy and hurt people and then try to distance themselves from the bad publicity later.

I saw a statistic a while back that said about 20% of Muslims are extremists. So what is the 80% doing to expunge Islam of the extremists? About as much as the Vatican is doing to expunge Catholicism of the pedophiles. Not a damn thing.