What is 'Islamophobia'?

[shmogie]

Its a known fact that many Christians still keep the OT, but at the same time they cherry pick it, not wanting to read the terrible bits, it seems this is what you are doing, you can't have it all good, without the bad.

Give me some of the terrible bits, and we will discuss them. Keep is simply the wrong word. That implies a specific act. Try have faith in, or believe it is a true record of God's acts, or something like that. The only thing in the OT to keep is the Torah, the law, and most Christians and many Jews don't

 

[shmogie]

The same as HOMOPHOBIA, an intimidation towards the just.

LOL

 

[psychoslice]

Give me some of the terrible bits, and we will discuss them. Keep is simply the wrong word. That implies a specific act. Try have faith in, or believe it is a true record of God's acts, or something like that. The only thing in the OT to keep is the Torah, the law, and most Christians and many Jews don't

Gee, where do I start, there is so much of it, but below is a link that has many bad things about the bible, there is just too many of them for me to bring up here.

Top 20 Evil Bible Stories

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I can assume then you also didn't see the rallies where prominent national Christian leaders spoke on his behalf, as a strong supporter of Christian values, with him sitting on the dais ?

Christians speaking on his behalf doesn't make him a Christian. You're a fool if you think Trump is a Christian, and even he himself has said he's never done anything to apologize for. God just was not a part of this election. With the exception of abortion, he's more Libertarian-leaning than the average Republican.

in the war humanistic liberalism has declared ?

War? There is no war. The only ones speaking of this war are those Christians who find the Devil hidden in every shadow.

A small group of Somali moslems were hired as general laborers for a beer distributor. When he asked them to load trucks with beer, they refused, and he fired them.

Yes. That was bull****, and not how many courts have ruled. We can also look at the ending of slavery and segregation, legalizing interracial marriages, legalizing same sex marriages, and the civil rights act. And, what is sad, is that Christianity played a role in opposing all of those things. Had the Southern slave owners not complained and considered it their "God given right," slavery would have been banned and abolished when the Constitution was ratified. But our courts have ruled, and made laws, that even if it is your belief you cannot kill your child should they worship gods other than Jehovah.

BTW, if bruce jenner pulled out his wang in a lady's restroom with my wife or daughters present, I would make him cry. On second thought, he would be sitting like a woman, right ? So maybe he could maintain the illusion

"I would make him cry." How very "Christ-like" of you. And I doubt she'd give enough of a **** about you to let you brake her down into tears. You're not some Billy ******, and having the urge to express such a thing only shows the hypocrisy of the average Christian, who claims to follow a man about peace, love, and taking care of each other (basically a Roman-era Hippy) but practices intolerance and hatred. And, do remember, with Christ it isn't so much about what you say or even do, but to even have sinful thoughts is to sin in your heart.

 

[shmogie]

Christians speaking on his behalf doesn't make him a Christian. You're a fool if you think Trump is a Christian, and even he himself has said he's never done anything to apologize for. God just was not a part of this election. With the exception of abortion, he's more Libertarian-leaning than the average Republican.

War? There is no war. The only ones speaking of this war are those Christians who find the Devil hidden in every shadow.

Yes. That was bull****, and not how many courts have ruled. We can also look at the ending of slavery and segregation, legalizing interracial marriages, legalizing same sex marriages, and the civil rights act. And, what is sad, is that Christianity played a role in opposing all of those things. Had the Southern slave owners not complained and considered it their "God given right," slavery would have been banned and abolished when the Constitution was ratified. But our courts have ruled, and made laws, that even if it is your belief you cannot kill your child should they worship gods other than Jehovah.

"I would make him cry." How very "Christ-like" of you. And I doubt she'd give enough of a **** about you to let you brake her down into tears. You're not some Billy ******, and having the urge to express such a thing only shows the hypocrisy of the average Christian, who claims to follow a man about peace, love, and taking care of each other (basically a Roman-era Hippy) but practices intolerance and hatred. And, do remember, with Christ it isn't so much about what you say or even do, but to even have sinful thoughts is to sin in your heart.

You can't find a thing in the Bible denying interracial marriages promoting segregation, or slavery, in fact, you find just the opposite. I agree, the Founders were not willing to abolish slavery, and they should have. They did not for pragmatic reasons, which should never trump right. It was corrected when 650,000 white people died in a war to abolish slavery, some my ancestors who died on the Union side. Contrary to what you might think, I was in favor of civil unions for homosexuals with all the rights and obligations of marriage. I balked at " marriage " because I don't think the law has a right to change the meaning of a word consistently used and defined for thousands of years. Unfortunately for your position, homosexuality is specifically addressed in the Bible, both OT and NT. Because of that instruction, and the clear instructions on marriage, I should not be compelled to participate in their marriage rite, that is my Constitutionally guaranteed right I don't hate homosexuals, I wish then no ill, my Faith prescribes nothing but respect for them as God's children. I however must follow the narrowly defined instruction about them in the NT. If I do not, then I have substituted my own will for what is Gods will, and once started, where does that end ? I have no illusions that Trump is a Christian, I never supported him, and he was my second worst nightmare for President, but Hillary was my first. As to Jenner, obviously, you didn't see the humor in what I was saying. I do have, however, an objection to the whole "transgender" phenomenon. Except in very limited cases of genetic breakdown obvious at the time of birth, there are no transgender people, it is a foolish term. Sex is determined by every chromosome in every cell of a persons body. They don't mix, males always have male chromosomes And females always have female chromosomes. You may be of one sex, attracted to the same sex, but that doesn't change the genetics. So, taking Bruce no matter all the slicing and dicing, no matter the hormones taken, he is still a man. Oh, but he "identifies" as a woman. I never served in combat, but I identify as a combat veteran, does that make me one ? If my 31 year old niece identifies as a 65 year old, does that make her eligible for Social Security ? Of course not. So Bruce, a male, likes to pretend he is a female, and dress up with all the trimmings as one. That is certainly his right, he can pretend he is a mushroom for all I care. However, don't ask me to participate in the fantasy. Don't ask me to substitute reality for someones wishes. He can play a woman

all he wants, I don't care, he can walk down the street dressed like a woman, I don't care. However, if his fantasy intrudes on decency, I will object.

 

[JakofHearts]

Now back to hatred towards Christians.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You can't find a thing in the Bible denying interracial marriages promoting segregation, or slavery, in fact, you find just the opposite.

Many people have and still do take the commandment for Jews to not marry non Jews to mean people of different races cannot wed. As for slavery, it's all throughout the Bible and not condemned or denounced once. It is, on the other hand, affirmed and slaves are told to obey.

I agree, the Founders were not willing to abolish slavery, and they should have. They did not for pragmatic reasons, which should never trump right.

Many of them did want to abolish it, but their pragmatic reason for not was because the Southern states wouldn't have it, party because they felt it their god given Biblical religious right. For the sake of the country, Franklin convinced the others to give them the issue because he was sure something so inhumane would die out on its own soon anyways. Really, the seeds for the Civil War were sown at the Continental Convention, and it partly had to do with the Bible having many laws regulating the practice of slavery, and frequently commanding it.

I balked at " marriage " because I don't think the law has a right to change the meaning of a word consistently used and defined for thousands of years.

"Separate but equal" has been ruled unConstitutional, and you have no religious right to define marriage. Every society has had a concept of marriage, it is true, but the exact definition of, intentions behind, and the participants involved do indeed vary from place to place and time to time.

Unfortunately for your position, homosexuality is specifically addressed in the Bible, both OT and NT.

Yes. I know. It says to kill them. That is a problem.

Because of that instruction, and the clear instructions on marriage, I should not be compelled to participate in their marriage rite,

Then don't potentially put yourself in that position. When you serve the public, you serve the public. You have no right to pick and choose. When the law says "no discrimination," religious people should not get a special exemption. It's like going to a rock concert and then complain that people are smoking pot because you don't want to be around it. If you don't want to be around it, don't put yourself at risk of exposure.

my Faith prescribes nothing but respect for them as God's children.

It says to kill them.

As to Jenner, obviously, you didn't see the humor in what I was saying. I do have, however, an objection to the whole "transgender" phenomenon. Except in very limited cases of genetic breakdown obvious at the time of birth, there are no transgender people, it is a foolish term. Sex is determined by every chromosome in every cell of a persons body. They don't mix, males always have male chromosomes And females always have female chromosomes. You may be of one sex, attracted to the same sex, but that doesn't change the genetics.

You have obviously never studied sex, sexuality, gender, or the genetics and cultural practices behind it all. For example, some men do have XX chromosomes, while some women have XY, and there are many many variations in between. At the brain, there are indeed variations between male and female, and even variations of those variations. As for "phenomenon," we actually have evidence that there were transgender people even in long ago pre-history times, and they were accepted into their societies.

So Bruce, a male, likes to pretend he is a female, and dress up with all the trimmings as one. That is certainly his right, he can pretend he is a mushroom for all I care. However, don't ask me to participate in the fantasy. Don't ask me to substitute reality for someones wishes. He can play a woman

Medical research suggests otherwise. Personally, I think the LBGT community would be one Jesus would especially reach out to, not because of their ways, but because the hardships others place upon them. It would of course upset many to see him associating with such sinners, but that's totally cool to him. It helps him sort out those who follow him from those that don't.

 

[shmogie]

I will take your points one at a time; Jews are not a race, they are a religion. Many Jews, racially, are Semites. There are negroid Jews, Caucasian Jews, etc., etc. So the idea you point to re intermarriage because of race is false. It is about marrying someone of a different religion, and the problems inherent in that In the NT slaves are told to be Christian in their service, but also to take any opportunity to gain their freedom. What would be the result of a slave disobeying when Rome ruled, at best a serious beating, at worst death. Paul also makes clear that in Christ there is no Jew nor Greek, ( all races are equal), No slave nor rich (all stations in life are equal). Separate but equal, referred to segregation by race, not use of the English language. Marriage has always referred to a union between a man and woman, for thousands of rears in the English and pre English mother languages. My objection to the term isn't religious, it is simply that no court of 6 people has the right to change the meaning of the English language. What if six justices declared that horses were no longer quadrapeds, but were bipeds, regardless of their opinion, what does the language mean ? Yes, under the first Covenant the ragtag Israelites were given as part of the Torah, the command to kill homosexuals. I can think of reasons why at that place and time this was commanded, but it is irrelevant, only moslems murder them, Jews don't, Christian's were given very narrow guidelines about them. In Christianity, marriage is solely and completely between one man and one woman. Sex outside of marriage is a sin. So, homosexuals cannot be married ( according to the NT, and Christ ) and if they habitually and willfully practice sin (any sex) they cannot be members of the church, nor partake of the rites of the Church. Of course, one is prohibited from supporting this sin, or assisting in it ( participation in homosexual weddings ). That's it. Paul says that if one were to avoid homosexuals OUTSIDE the Church, one one have to go to another planet. They are to be treated no different than any other unrepentant sinner in the world, That means that all the counsel given in the NT to treat all people with kindness, respect, and in a dignified manner applies to them. You did notice that I did not specifically identify any chromosomes. XY and XX chromosomes are overwhelmingly present respectively in male and female cells. There are limited times when this isn't true, BUT sex is determined by specific genes in the genome. So, a rare person could have XX chromosomes, but the genetic code still determines they are a male. BTW there is NO gene that determines a person to be born a homosexual. By the genome women are born as women and men are born as men. This is true but in extremely rare cases when the genetic code is damaged and a child could be born with combined physical characteristics of both sexes. A person born as a male, is a male, ditto for women. Science has no clear understanding why some think otherwise, regardless of what you may wish, there has been isolated no specific cause for homosexuality. As to the balance of rights, specifically what you consider discrimination, and I consider the right to practice freely ones religion, the supremes will ultimately decide. Christ certainly did reach out to all sinners, including homosexuals and people as sinful as me. I have given Bible studies to all kinds of "sinners", including those who commit the sin of homosexuality. Christ did not come to tell people that what they were doing in their lives was all just OK. He came in total love to explain his way of life. Virtually every true Christian has had to give up one or more cherished sins. Christ said to pick up your cross, the burden of being his follower, and follow him. Some will, some won't

 

[Notanumber]

Entertaining and educational at the same time.

 

[idav]

And does it exist at all?

IMO it is a buzzword used to silence people who voice criticisms of Islam.

We never hear of 'Christianiophobia' or 'Judeophobia' or 'Paganophobia' etc.

Other, it's a buzzword to legitimize descrimination of Islam by calling it a legitimate phobia.

 

[Lorgar-Aurelian]

And does it exist at all?

IMO it is a buzzword used to silence people who voice criticisms of Islam.

We never hear of 'Christianiophobia' or 'Judeophobia' or 'Paganophobia' etc.

It's similar to the way the word holocaust is used to silence people who criticize Israel. Look whether you have real criticism of Islam or Judaism or whatever people like to use buzzwords to make them stop the questions. Oh you have a problem with sharia law? Well you are a racist Islamaphobe.

I shall use this man to illustrate.

Look if you have legit criticism of anything people shouldn't just use buzzwords to make you shut up and should be able to argue their case.

 

[Lorgar-Aurelian]

Other, it's a buzzword to legitimize descrimination of Islam by calling it a legitimate phobia.

I have not seen very much legitimate discrimination against Islam in some time. AT least any that wasn't justified. Why don't you share some legitimate discrimination that isn't justified against Islam?

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I have not seen very much legitimate discrimination against Islam in some time. AT least any that wasn't justified. Why don't you share some legitimate discrimination that isn't justified against Islam?

Banning people from travelling to America because they're Muslims from a Muslim country aka Trump's Muslim ban, throwing people off of flights because they act or look overtly Muslim, Americans banning Muslims from buying guns etc

 

[Lorgar-Aurelian]

Banning people from travelling to America because they're Muslims from a Muslim country aka Trump's Muslim ban, throwing people off of flights because they act or look overtly Muslim, Americans banning Muslims from buying guns etc

banning people from certain muslim countries because they are known to produce terrorists sounds justified to me. Not sure I've heard anything about the other two but i'd be pretty fine with it depending on what that meant.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

banning people from certain muslim countries because they are known to produce terrorists sounds justified to me.

If terrorism is the criteria for banning people then why aren't Saudi Arabia, Lebanon or Egypt on the list; all countries with citizens who took part in the 9/11 terror attacks - with Saudi Arabia being a known exporter of Wahabi indoctrination and arms to mujahideen groups in Syria?

Not sure I've heard anything about the other two but i'd be pretty fine with it depending on what that meant.

So you're fine with illegal laws being passed because they don't affect you? This is the dictionary definition of privilege.

 

[shmogie]

Banning people from travelling to America because they're Muslims from a Muslim country aka Trump's Muslim ban, throwing people off of flights because they act or look overtly Muslim, Americans banning Muslims from buying guns etc

The Pesident has the right under statute to make security determinations related to people inbound to the country. Peoplw outside the country who are not citizens or legal residents have no rights granted by the Constitution, certainly no right to come here. If this were a "moslem ban" then it would apply to all moslem country's not just the ones where background information is virtually non existent. liberals have alway's used their particular judges to quash the will of the people and grant rights where none exist, it won't work this time

 

[Notanumber]

What about the persecuted Christians?

They are the ones that should have been given preference when Obama was in charge.

‘Largest Massacre of Christians in Syria’ Ignored - Raymond Ibrahim

West Ignores Extensive Massacre of Christians in Syria - Validated Independent News

 

[Akivah]

If terrorism is the criteria for banning people then why aren't Saudi Arabia, Lebanon or Egypt on the list; all countries with citizens who took part in the 9/11 terror attacks - with Saudi Arabia being a known exporter of Wahabi indoctrination and arms to mujahideen groups in Syria?

I think its interesting that people that are against the US travel ban, always use as their counter-argument, that the ban should be enlarged.

 

[shmogie]

What about the persecuted Christians?

They are the ones that should have been given preference when Obama was in charge.

‘Largest Massacre of Christians in Syria’ Ignored - Raymond Ibrahim

West Ignores Extensive Massacre of Christians in Syria - Validated Independent News

Absolutely correct. The moslems of the middle east are in a systematic jihad to obliterate Christians, and the Yazidi's, Very little of their former populations are left. By statute, The President can give preference to specific groups under intense persecution for immigration. osama bin obama and the liberals couldn't care less about these people. In fact, if they could figure out a way to do it, they would eliminate Christians here,

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I think its interesting that people that are against the US travel ban, always use as their counter-argument, that the ban should be enlarged.

I don't think the ban should be enlarged. I'm saying the idea that the ban is designed to keep the U.S. safe from countries which export with terrorism is, in my opinion, a red herring because the ban does not cover some of the larger exporters of terrorism like Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.