Muhammadanism WEBSITE...

[guids]

AZ,


I think we are in total agreement. Its just that the immediate threat happens to be muslims this time around, and not the catholics.

[pokerbobo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OP why do you assume that the guy who made this site is the central authority on all things muslim?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you deny what he says ?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would, and that is based on the title of the website. There is no such thing as mohammadanism because any MUSLIM would know that this would be naming the religion after a "prophet" which is different from Christianity which is based on Christ.

The other statements are mostly nonsense and are approaching things from a very narrow point of view. Even the wiki paints a more accurate picture than that website. You may as well go to alquaida's website to get an interpretation depending on the results you are looking for.

[/ QUOTE ]
Just because it isnt named mohamadism means nothing, mohamad is the central character, and speaks for god in the koran, essentialy he is a christ-like figure. You say that wiki paints a more accurate picture...well, how do you know if you have never read the koran or at least books on it?


edit: I thought you said you have never read it, but got you confused w/ someoen else, so if Im wrong pls say so.


Have you read the koran? I have, and books to clarify it, basically "cliff notes" and in depth explorations (it was for a term paper). A lot of the koran is a handbook for war and fear mongering. A lot like the old testament was though, its just that christian extremists in the year 2007 are much much more benign than muslim extremists. Most muslims imo, are at a crossroads, do I believe that they really want to see people of other faiths slaughtered? no. do I think they have an irrational fear that if they dont support or do what the koran says they wont go to "heaven"? yes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was born a muslim but no longer consider myself one now (practice buddhism now and folks aren't happy and it's been a few years). I am familiar with lots of it and was turned off to what I saw as the politicization of it. One thing that turns me off on ANY religion is when it tries to get involved in politics--NO EXCEPTIONS.

As for your interpretation, you can take sections of the bible and see the war mongering that goes on in there--it is all a matter of taking the book LITERALLY vs FIGURATIVELY. Look at what happened during the crusades, the spanish inquisition and other sections of christian history--the people at the time somehow believed what they did was ordained by god--is this any different? It should also be noted that much of the problems in the history of christianity occurred 1300-1500 years after the death of christ--currently, islam is ~ 1400 years after the death of mohammed so it could be argued that this religion is going through its own "dark ages' where it tries to reconcile its beliefs with the modern world.

As the saying goes--more people have been killed in the name of religion than all other causes throughout the history of mankind--people just don't [censored] learn the lessons of history.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good Post.... the main difference now is weapons and transportation. Back when Christians were doing this, it took a long time to get from one region to another, now you can be anywhere on earth in a matter of hours. And one crazy with the funding and contacts can kill millions instantly, and without any of the victims being able to fight back.

Hooray god, allah, whatever.

[JOHNY CA$H]

Wow, so you've shown that it's possible for a religion to be used by stupid people to justify violent behavior.

Awesome. Cutting edge stuff.

[JOHNY CA$H]

[ QUOTE ]
OP why do you assume that the guy who made this site knows his ass from his elbow?

[/ QUOTE ]

[JOHNY CA$H]

[ QUOTE ]
AZ,


I think we are in total agreement. Its just that the immediate threat happens to be muslims this time around, and not the catholics.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um... no.

Calculate a death toll anyway you like. It's not even CLOSE.

[JOHNY CA$H]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
AZ,


I think we are in total agreement. Its just that the immediate threat happens to be muslims this time around, and not the catholics.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um... no.

Calculate a death toll anyway you like. It's not even CLOSE.

[/ QUOTE ]

And by the way, that is not proof of some inherent violent tendencies found within Catholicism. It is simply common sense that when two groups of people (both capable of incredible generosity and altruism as well as incredible evil and barbarism, as ALL humans are) clash, the one with the bigger guns is going to kill more people. Funny, common sense used to be applauded.

Look, the bible condones some pretty brutal things at times, including genocide. Now if someone were to come on here and say this means that the Christians and/or Jews MUST be inherently violent, they'd be shouted down and probably banned- and rightly so. But for whatever reason OP, you are still allowed to come on here and spread your bone-headed hate speech. You think that because you read some fanatics website and a few passages of the Koran out of context, you are now an authority on what real Muslims MUST believe. You aren't.

Whether you take the past year as your sample size, the past decade, the past century, or the past 1000 years, over any of these it is clear that Catholics have killed more Muslims than vice versa. This being so, your ideas crumble when exposed to the light of empirical evidence. They're dumb. you're like the big elephant afraid of the tiny mouse.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
AZ,


I think we are in total agreement. Its just that the immediate threat happens to be muslims this time around, and not the catholics.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um... no.

Calculate a death toll anyway you like. It's not even CLOSE.

[/ QUOTE ]

And by the way, that is not proof of some inherent violent tendencies found within Catholicism. It is simply common sense that when two groups of people (both capable of incredible generosity and altruism as well as incredible evil and barbarism, as ALL humans are) clash, the one with the bigger guns is going to kill more people. Funny, common sense used to be applauded.

Look, the bible condones some pretty brutal things at times, including genocide. Now if someone were to come on here and say this means that the Christians and/or Jews MUST be inherently violent, they'd be shouted down and probably banned- and rightly so. But for whatever reason OP, you are still allowed to come on here and spread your bone-headed hate speech. You think that because you read some fanatics website and a few passages of the Koran out of context, you are now an authority on what real Muslims MUST believe. You aren't.

Whether you take the past year as your sample size, the past decade, the past century, or the past 1000 years, over any of these it is clear that Catholics have killed more Muslims than vice versa. This being so, your ideas crumble when exposed to the light of empirical evidence. They're dumb. you're like the big elephant afraid of the tiny mouse.

[/ QUOTE ]


Your reading comprehension is that of a 3rd graders.



who said muslims are inherently evil? no one.

I read teh whole koran, and books to complement it, then wrote a lengthy paper summarizing it. Im not an expert by any means, but know the teachings more than most on this board.


You think that because you read some fanatics website and a few passages of the Koran out of context, you are now an authority on what real Muslims MUST believe.



these terrible messages arent regulated to a "few pages". again. learn to read.



It is simply common sense that when two groups of people (both capable of incredible generosity and altruism as well as incredible evil and barbarism, as ALL humans are) clash, the one with the bigger guns is going to kill more people.


Im fairly sure that this view has been expressed several times in this thread, and you just love jerking yourself off to how sympathetic and "diverse" you can be. can you understand english or what?

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
AZ,


I think we are in total agreement. Its just that the immediate threat happens to be muslims this time around, and not the catholics.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um... no.

Calculate a death toll anyway you like. It's not even CLOSE.

[/ QUOTE ]

And by the way, that is not proof of some inherent violent tendencies found within Catholicism. It is simply common sense that when two groups of people (both capable of incredible generosity and altruism as well as incredible evil and barbarism, as ALL humans are) clash, the one with the bigger guns is going to kill more people. Funny, common sense used to be applauded.

Look, the bible condones some pretty brutal things at times, including genocide. Now if someone were to come on here and say this means that the Christians and/or Jews MUST be inherently violent, they'd be shouted down and probably banned- and rightly so. But for whatever reason OP, you are still allowed to come on here and spread your bone-headed hate speech. You think that because you read some fanatics website and a few passages of the Koran out of context, you are now an authority on what real Muslims MUST believe. You aren't.

Whether you take the past year as your sample size, the past decade, the past century, or the past 1000 years, over any of these it is clear that Catholics have killed more Muslims than vice versa. This being so, your ideas crumble when exposed to the light of empirical evidence. They're dumb. you're like the big elephant afraid of the tiny mouse.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you change "Catholics" to "Religious non-muslims" and I think you find more murders by Muslims than RNMs over the last decade. (Not to mention the fact that far more Muslims were killed by other Muslims than by RNMs).

Religions, being composed of people, evolve. What is important is not what WAS done in the name of religion, or called for in ancient writings, it is what IS BEING DONE in the name of religion.

[JOHNY CA$H]

[ QUOTE ]

If you change "Catholics" to "Religious non-muslims" and I think you find more murders by Muslims than RNMs over the last decade. (Not to mention the fact that far more Muslims were killed by other Muslims than by RNMs).


[/ QUOTE ]

This simply isn't true. The US has killed more Muslims in the past decade than vice versa. The U.S, of course, being the preeminent Christian-populated nation. Or are you not including Christian state-sponsored killings in your analysis, while including Muslim state-sponsored killings? I just don't see how you can come to this conclusion.

[JOHNY CA$H]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
AZ,


I think we are in total agreement. Its just that the immediate threat happens to be muslims this time around, and not the catholics.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um... no.

Calculate a death toll anyway you like. It's not even CLOSE.

[/ QUOTE ]

And by the way, that is not proof of some inherent violent tendencies found within Catholicism. It is simply common sense that when two groups of people (both capable of incredible generosity and altruism as well as incredible evil and barbarism, as ALL humans are) clash, the one with the bigger guns is going to kill more people. Funny, common sense used to be applauded.

Look, the bible condones some pretty brutal things at times, including genocide. Now if someone were to come on here and say this means that the Christians and/or Jews MUST be inherently violent, they'd be shouted down and probably banned- and rightly so. But for whatever reason OP, you are still allowed to come on here and spread your bone-headed hate speech. You think that because you read some fanatics website and a few passages of the Koran out of context, you are now an authority on what real Muslims MUST believe. You aren't.

Whether you take the past year as your sample size, the past decade, the past century, or the past 1000 years, over any of these it is clear that Catholics have killed more Muslims than vice versa. This being so, your ideas crumble when exposed to the light of empirical evidence. They're dumb. you're like the big elephant afraid of the tiny mouse.

[/ QUOTE ]


Your reading comprehension is that of a 3rd graders.



who said muslims are inherently evil? no one.

I read teh whole koran, and books to complement it, then wrote a lengthy paper summarizing it. Im not an expert by any means, but know the teachings more than most on this board.


You think that because you read some fanatics website and a few passages of the Koran out of context, you are now an authority on what real Muslims MUST believe.



these terrible messages arent regulated to a "few pages". again. learn to read.



It is simply common sense that when two groups of people (both capable of incredible generosity and altruism as well as incredible evil and barbarism, as ALL humans are) clash, the one with the bigger guns is going to kill more people.


Im fairly sure that this view has been expressed several times in this thread, and you just love jerking yourself off to how sympathetic and "diverse" you can be. can you understand english or what?

[/ QUOTE ]

I read just fine. OP says Muslims must support violence. I say this is ignorant. You jump in, throw some cheap insults, and tell me that you read the Koran. I'm not sure how that is relevant to my comments to OP.

1) You're POV is predicated upon a double standard. Let me demonstrate.

You point to violent passages in the Koran as proof that Islam is violent. However, you ignore that the Bible is just as violent, and at times supports murder and genocide of non-believers as well. You hold one side up to a certain standard, but view the other side in a different context. For instance, a Muslim straps a bomb to himself and blows himself up. This is evidence to you that Islam is violent. Now A Christian kills a doctor in front of an abortion clinic. This is just a Christian who is misinterpreting the bible.

There is a passage in the Bible that states if a women sits on her chair while menstruating, the chair must be burned. Now, if we read this without context, we can come to some wacky conclusions. Are Christians really a threat to the chairs of menstruating women everywhere? CONTEXT.

2) Your POV is based on assumptions.

The OP stated that because the Koran says that Muslims must support those who are fighting the cause of Allah, therefore they must support terrorist groups. That is making a lot of assumptions. Are these groups really fighting for the cause of Allah? Does simply saying you are make it so? This is quite a stretch, and lends itself to all kind of crazy outcomes. If you build on assumption after assumption, you can pretty much conclude any thing you'd like. For instance, one of the Ten Commandments is honor thy mother and father. Now, I have this German Christian friend. Thing is, his grand father had a position in the nazi party. Since real Christians honor their mother and father, Does that make his parents nazis? And if he's a real Christian, what does that make HIM? It's a silly notion, for sure, but no more silly than taking a 1500 year old passage saying "support those who fight for God" and extrapolating from this "modern Muslims must support terrorists".