RE: Another outrage from the R of P

RE: Another outrage from the R of P (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomKen -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 10:51:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic I think that was his point.... Certainly how I read it, fact...not all pedophiles are priests, not all preists are pedos.... Not all muslims support rape of women.... not all rapists are muslims I alluded to it myself. more than once You could be right. I may be getting him confused with another poster. If that is the case I apologize. Sure... You simply attacked me without bothering to even read the back and forth.

truckinslave -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 12:37:40 PM)
Assuming everything you say about the Mo incident is gospel truth... how exactly is it a religious issue?

truckinslave -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 12:39:24 PM)
The Islapologists are quite adept at cognitive dissonance.

mnottertail -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 12:40:49 PM)
the nutsackers do not rise beyond propaganda and therefore have no need of cogitation.

truckinslave -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 12:43:23 PM)
Seriously? Read post #7 Under Sharia law, the only proof of rape is the testimony of four- 4- male- male- witnesses. Our infidel tests, scientific proof, common sense, and decency do not count in a Saudia Arabian rape case. You would indeed therein beg, but, sadly, to no avail.

mnottertail -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 12:48:59 PM)
how does that shake out to cognitive dissonance? No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. So, given when that was written and the context in which it was written (those witnesses had to be male, we didnt even have to say it out loud, it was very well understood)............uh, we half sharians or half congnitively dissonant or what? read the one that he who is without fault let him cast the first stone sorta numbered post there whereever that is.

truckinslave -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 12:52:16 PM)
quote: The essence of being a moral person is being able to say: "A is better than B' Your attempt to reword that statement as a sort of refutation of it was a total fail. Would you care to try to argue against it in a straightforward manner? I seriously doubt that you can. I seriously doubt anyone can.

Moonhead -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 4:43:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Seriously? Read post #7 Under Sharia law, the only proof of rape is the testimony of four- 4- male- male- witnesses. Our infidel tests, scientific proof, common sense, and decency do not count in a Saudia Arabian rape case. You would indeed therein beg, but, sadly, to no avail. You've yet to demonstrate that the Pakistani legal system is run under shariah.

Phydeaux -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 4:58:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NoBimbosAllowed quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux This is quite all poppycock. Rape can only be proved by witnesses. rape-kits and medical professionals trained to use them would beg to differ. No they wouldn't. Since we're talking about Pakistan here. And the usage of rape kits is virtually non-existent. And even if a medical exam is conducted, most of the time the defense will be that we had consensual sex. And the testimony of the woman is insufficient to convict.

Phydeaux -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 5:02:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave I think they are Bart Stupac: when pushed by the Party/Mosque they agree to whatever evil is required of them. Then you really know nothing of Muslims. They run the gamut just as members of every other faith do. Following any aspect of sharia is no more required of Muslims than following the mosaic code is of Jews or Christians. All that is required of Muslims is obeying the five pillars, declaring there is no god but Allah, praying five times a day, fasting during Ramadan, giving a set percentage of your income to the poor and making the pilgrimage to Mecca once during their lifetime if that is feasible. What you obsess over is the repugnant behavior of fundamentalist. Which faith the fundamentalists are is really immaterial. If Christian fundamentalists ever take over a nation you can expect the same sorts of atrocities you now attack Muslims for. Just look into the actions of Oliver Cromwell to see that even "civilized Christians" are capable of atrocities in the name of their faith. Not true. The earlier verses are subrogated to later versus. All muslims are called to jihad. Despite your febrile attempts at moral equivalence the religions are not the same. Despite the actions of men in any religion, the teachings of Christ are in no way similar to the teachings of Mohammed. Christ 'do good to those that injure you' Mohommed 'terrorize them, kill them in their sleep' Christ he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Muhammad He will not enter Paradise whose neighbour is not secure from his wrongful conduct I've read both the Bible and Qu''ran cover to cover and the teachings of Muhammed and Christ are identical. Both are based on the older semitic faith and both teach a new way that says to love everyone else etc.. Both books also contain passages that can be used to cast doubt on those central themes. Jihad does not mean holy war as it is so often stated. Jihad literally means struggle. In context in the Qu'ran it means to evangelize as a duty just as the New Testament requires the same behavior of Christians. Bullshit. Which only reveals that either you do not understand the teaching or you are being deliberately deceptive. In the first hand the teaching is that times of troubles are upon you. It is not saying kill anyone. And again. your second quote is a subrogated quote. Which means that official Islamic teaching means that it was replaced with the obligation to commit jihad.

Phydeaux -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 5:04:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Only historical moral equivalence is weaker than current moral equivalence. The essence of being a moral person is being able to say: "A is better than B'; not "A and B are equally bad because of something A did a few centuries ago". That, imo, is the domain of the morally bankrupt. This current, open, flourishing evil, not an historical exercise. If you think that the "essence of being a moral person" is being able to rationalise judgements/prejudices that bignote your own worldview and help you feel superior to others, you have an awful lot to learn about morality. You seem fond of Christian adages so here's one you might like to contemplate to help guide you in your quest for moral purity: 'Let those without sin cast the first stone.' Often the first half of the quote is used - never the second. It continues . .. "for by the measure yea judge shall you be judged."

Lucylastic -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 5:18:26 PM)
I find it ironic and laughable, that people who claim no one has the right to disparage US laws, oh never mind, LOL [image]local://upfiles/228382/1C0650DB667D40008B163379E50DC3ED.jpg[/image]

DomKen -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/30/2013 8:27:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave I think they are Bart Stupac: when pushed by the Party/Mosque they agree to whatever evil is required of them. Then you really know nothing of Muslims. They run the gamut just as members of every other faith do. Following any aspect of sharia is no more required of Muslims than following the mosaic code is of Jews or Christians. All that is required of Muslims is obeying the five pillars, declaring there is no god but Allah, praying five times a day, fasting during Ramadan, giving a set percentage of your income to the poor and making the pilgrimage to Mecca once during their lifetime if that is feasible. What you obsess over is the repugnant behavior of fundamentalist. Which faith the fundamentalists are is really immaterial. If Christian fundamentalists ever take over a nation you can expect the same sorts of atrocities you now attack Muslims for. Just look into the actions of Oliver Cromwell to see that even "civilized Christians" are capable of atrocities in the name of their faith. Not true. The earlier verses are subrogated to later versus. All muslims are called to jihad. Despite your febrile attempts at moral equivalence the religions are not the same. Despite the actions of men in any religion, the teachings of Christ are in no way similar to the teachings of Mohammed. Christ 'do good to those that injure you' Mohommed 'terrorize them, kill them in their sleep' Christ he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Muhammad He will not enter Paradise whose neighbour is not secure from his wrongful conduct I've read both the Bible and Qu''ran cover to cover and the teachings of Muhammed and Christ are identical. Both are based on the older semitic faith and both teach a new way that says to love everyone else etc.. Both books also contain passages that can be used to cast doubt on those central themes. Jihad does not mean holy war as it is so often stated. Jihad literally means struggle. In context in the Qu'ran it means to evangelize as a duty just as the New Testament requires the same behavior of Christians. Bullshit. Which only reveals that either you do not understand the teaching or you are being deliberately deceptive. In the first hand the teaching is that times of troubles are upon you. It is not saying kill anyone. And again. your second quote is a subrogated quote. Which means that official Islamic teaching means that it was replaced with the obligation to commit jihad. Bull. The first quote clearly says be ready to fight and kill and the second quote is right out of the Hadith of Abu Huraira who attributes it directly to Muhammed. And again, jihad when used in the Qu'ran means to evangelize which is also require by Christ in the NT. Subrogated is a western legal term. I have no idea what word you meant to use but that wasn't it.

Phydeaux -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/31/2013 12:11:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave I think they are Bart Stupac: when pushed by the Party/Mosque they agree to whatever evil is required of them. Then you really know nothing of Muslims. They run the gamut just as members of every other faith do. Following any aspect of sharia is no more required of Muslims than following the mosaic code is of Jews or Christians. All that is required of Muslims is obeying the five pillars, declaring there is no god but Allah, praying five times a day, fasting during Ramadan, giving a set percentage of your income to the poor and making the pilgrimage to Mecca once during their lifetime if that is feasible. What you obsess over is the repugnant behavior of fundamentalist. Which faith the fundamentalists are is really immaterial. If Christian fundamentalists ever take over a nation you can expect the same sorts of atrocities you now attack Muslims for. Just look into the actions of Oliver Cromwell to see that even "civilized Christians" are capable of atrocities in the name of their faith. Not true. The earlier verses are subrogated to later versus. All muslims are called to jihad. Despite your febrile attempts at moral equivalence the religions are not the same. Despite the actions of men in any religion, the teachings of Christ are in no way similar to the teachings of Mohammed. Christ 'do good to those that injure you' Mohommed 'terrorize them, kill them in their sleep' Christ he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Muhammad He will not enter Paradise whose neighbour is not secure from his wrongful conduct I've read both the Bible and Qu''ran cover to cover and the teachings of Muhammed and Christ are identical. Both are based on the older semitic faith and both teach a new way that says to love everyone else etc.. Both books also contain passages that can be used to cast doubt on those central themes. Jihad does not mean holy war as it is so often stated. Jihad literally means struggle. In context in the Qu'ran it means to evangelize as a duty just as the New Testament requires the same behavior of Christians. Bullshit. Which only reveals that either you do not understand the teaching or you are being deliberately deceptive. In the first hand the teaching is that times of troubles are upon you. It is not saying kill anyone. And again. your second quote is a subrogated quote. Which means that official Islamic teaching means that it was replaced with the obligation to commit jihad. Bull. The first quote clearly says be ready to fight and kill and the second quote is right out of the Hadith of Abu Huraira who attributes it directly to Muhammed. And again, jihad when used in the Qu'ran means to evangelize which is also require by Christ in the NT. Subrogated is a western legal term. I have no idea what word you meant to use but that wasn't it. Again - bull. Find Anywhere in the new testament where christ says - go kill someone. Your moral equivalency is ridiculously and it just shows how debased your sense of honor is when you will say anything. I can give hundreds of verses in the Koran saying to kill the infidels, to terrorize them. You can't give me one quote in the NEW TESTAMENT telling christians to terrorize. Because the message of christ repeated time and time again: "do good to them that persecute you" "they shall know you by your love for one another" "if a man strike your cheek, turn and offer him your other"

DomKen -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/31/2013 12:57:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Again - bull. Find Anywhere in the new testament where christ says - go kill someone. Your moral equivalency is ridiculously and it just shows how debased your sense of honor is when you will say anything. Matthew 15:4 to 7 Same story in Mark 7:9 to 13

Hillwilliam -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/31/2013 1:53:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Very true, if there was such a thing as "homegrown renewable energy" lying around in sufficiently massive quantities. You ae aware that in a very few years the US will be a net energy exporter? What do you think our biggest export already is?

graceadieu -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/31/2013 4:28:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Assuming everything you say about the Mo incident is gospel truth... how exactly is it a religious issue? It's not. That's my point. Young girls getting raped and then dumped somewhere to possibly die is not something that only involves Muslims, and they don't get away with it only in Muslim-run countries. It's something that Christian men in the United States do too.

Moonhead -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/31/2013 4:34:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Very true, if there was such a thing as "homegrown renewable energy" lying around in sufficiently massive quantities. You ae aware that in a very few years the US will be a net energy exporter? What do you think our biggest export already is? It used to be, but you people shifted from being a net exporter to a net importer a while back, did you not? There's suspicions that the shift has as much to do with panic buying as it does with production going down.

tweakabelle -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (10/31/2013 11:26:14 PM)
It looks like the US is now a net energy exporter again : "U.S. exports of gasoline, diesel and other oil-based fuels are soaring, putting the nation otrack to be a net exporter of petroleum products in 2011 for the first time in 62 years. A combination of booming demand from emerging markets and faltering domestic activity means the U.S. is exporting more fuel than it imports, upending the historical norm. U.S. exports of gasoline, diesel and other oil-based fuels are soaring, putting the nation on track to be a net exporter of petroleum products in 2011 for the first time in 62 years, Liam Pleven reports on Markets Hub. According to data released by the U.S. Energy Information Administration on Tuesday, the U.S. sent abroad 753.4 million barrels of everything from gasoline to jet fuel in the first nine months of this year, while it imported 689.4 million barrels." http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970203441704577068670488306242 It seems reasonable to expect the US interest in the Middle East to wane as its energy independence increases in coming years.

thishereboi -> RE: Another outrage from the R of P (11/1/2013 6:16:40 AM)
I find it laughable that every time someone suggests following the bible these kinds of passages are pulled out of the old testiment. When was the last time you heard any church suggest this? I am pretty sure stoning is illegal at least in the US and I am pretty sure abuse laws take care of the rest. But don't let that slow you down. If it can be used to make someone else look bad it's all good.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625