Page 2 of 5
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:31 am
by Audie
So, Paul, how would you describe the relationship between Nazism and dead Jews?
Nazism doesnt kill, Germans do?
How is Islam better?
Is US foreign policy the cause of islamic terrorism in lets see...
Britain, netherlands, germany, france, russia, china, countries all over the middle east
and africa, pakistan, india, thailand, indonesia, philippines...?
Duly noted that Christians dont take out their problems on others that way.
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:46 am
by Audie
Jac3510 wrote:The babystep is still an unjustified logical leap, and it is one in you, and in any case, your present aggression is coming from somewhere. Still praying for you, Audie. I hope your day improves.
Science =good, religion =bad is something you made up to attribute to me. How seriously stupid do feel its appropriate to claim someone is?
I dont like you now, I never did. See if you can guess why. "My aggression"? I was not addressing you when you chose to interject your tendentious falsehood. Then you dont even have it in you to take ownership of your own lie.
As for your "prayer"-
Save the smarm for yourself.
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:11 am
by Jac3510
I'm aware you don't like me and never have. I've been doing this long enough to know what that's about, too. And that's okay. I like you just fine. I don't like your word games, but I know how to separate that from you. And praying for you is not smarm. I mean it exactly as I said it. You seem extremely angry and hurt about something, and that was long before I entered the conversation. So whatever is going on with you, I hope and, yes I pray, that it gets better.
I do wish you all the best, Audie. And no, I'm not owning up to any "lie" I told about you, because I told no such lie. You can choose to mischaracterize my comments to assuage your own feelings and further promote you anger. I'm not taking responsibility for your frustrations. What I do take responsibility for is my concern for your wellbeing (and I mean that in a literal sense, not some abstract notion of the wellbeing of your soul). I also take responsibility for responding to a public charge against religion and faith that is false. You need to take responsibility for the fact that if you don't want the public commenting on your public remarks, then you either need to not make them or not respond to them.
So our responsibilities are cleary defined enough for my conscious. I'll leave you to your own.
God bless you, Audie.
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 10:57 am
by Storyteller
Religion didnt give us 9/11, extremist terrorists did.
Being Muslim doesnt make you a terrorist, becoming a suicide bomber or flying a plane into the WTC does.
Nazi's were terrorists.
Audie, you are coming across as particularly prickly today. (((Min)))
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 11:51 am
by PaulSacramento
Audie wrote:So, Paul, how would you describe the relationship between Nazism and dead Jews?
Nazism doesnt kill, Germans do?
How is Islam better?
Is US foreign policy the cause of islamic terrorism in lets see...
Britain, netherlands, germany, france, russia, china, countries all over the middle east
and africa, pakistan, india, thailand, indonesia, philippines...?
Duly noted that Christians dont take out their problems on others that way.
Nazism isn't a religion, it is a political ideology and it targeted Jews IN SPECIFIC as part of that ideology.
Nazi's killed Jews, Germans killed Jews BUT words and writings do NOT kill anyone.
I can write here that I believe that all people that rape should be castrated and killed and call this ideology Paulisim and if some one reads this and does that to a rapist did my ideology do that? did I do That?
No, the person that did the act, did that.
What we are talking about is motivation and whether religion can motivate people to do bad things, or perhaps more correctly, can religion motivate good people to do bad things.
Can it?
Yes, of course it can.
So can not being religious.
So can politics.
So can any ideology, like atheism.
What do they all have in common?
People.
Now, does Islam have a problem with terrorism? with violence? with killing infidels?
Yes, yes it does.
Why?
That is the question.
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 12:41 pm
by Audie
Jac3510 wrote:I'm aware you don't like me and never have. I've been doing this long enough to know what that's about, too. And that's okay. I like you just fine. I don't like your word games, but I know how to separate that from you. And praying for you is not smarm. I mean it exactly as I said it. You seem extremely angry and hurt about something, and that was long before I entered the conversation. So whatever is going on with you, I hope and, yes I pray, that it gets better.
I do wish you all the best, Audie. And no, I'm not owning up to any "lie" I told about you, because I told no such lie. You can choose to mischaracterize my comments to assuage your own feelings and further promote you anger. I'm not taking responsibility for your frustrations. What I do take responsibility for is my concern for your wellbeing (and I mean that in a literal sense, not some abstract notion of the wellbeing of your soul). I also take responsibility for responding to a public charge against religion and faith that is false. You need to take responsibility for the fact that if you don't want the public commenting on your public remarks, then you either need to not make them or not respond to them.
So our responsibilities are cleary defined enough for my conscious. I'll leave you to your own.
God bless you, Audie.
You did make up that thing about science= good, its as phony as your excuses for it, rationalize and avoid responsibility for yourself as you may.
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 12:44 pm
by Audie
PaulSacramento wrote:Audie wrote:So, Paul, how would you describe the relationship between Nazism and dead Jews?
Nazism doesnt kill, Germans do?
How is Islam better?
Is US foreign policy the cause of islamic terrorism in lets see...
Britain, netherlands, germany, france, russia, china, countries all over the middle east
and africa, pakistan, india, thailand, indonesia, philippines...?
Duly noted that Christians dont take out their problems on others that way.
Nazism isn't a religion, it is a political ideology and it targeted Jews IN SPECIFIC as part of that ideology.
Nazi's killed Jews, Germans killed Jews BUT words and writings do NOT kill anyone.
I can write here that I believe that all people that rape should be castrated and killed and call this ideology Paulisim and if some one reads this and does that to a rapist did my ideology do that? did I do That?
No, the person that did the act, did that.
What we are talking about is motivation and whether religion can motivate people to do bad things, or perhaps more correctly, can religion motivate good people to do bad things.
Can it?
Yes, of course it can.
So can not being religious.
So can politics.
So can any ideology, like atheism.
What do they all have in common?
People.
Now, does Islam have a problem with terrorism? with violence? with killing infidels?
Yes, yes it does.
Why?
That is the question.
Shall we quote from the Koran on the desirability of killing jews?
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 3:02 pm
by Furstentum Liechtenstein
Audie wrote:Shall we quote from the Koran on the desirability of killing jews?
The Koran is actually quite sympathetic towards Jews and Christians, even calling them "the people of the Book". (The "Book" being the Bible.)
Moreover, the Koran recognizes Israel's right to the land of Israel as a
divine right. My guess is that God allowed the perversion that is Islam but embedded within the koranic text His promise to Abram regarding the land.
Modern Muslims conveniently ignore these references in their "holy" book, just as rabbinical Judaism conveniently ignores the obvious references to Jesus written 700 years before His arrival on the world scene.
FL
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:32 pm
by abelcainsbrother
We are all sinners the bible tells us whether or not we believe in Jesus or not,we have all sinned and come short of the glory of God.But atheists have no leg to stand on because they have nothing to base their morality on unless they borrow from the bible or religion and they step into the morality God demands of us all in order to judge people who call themselves Christians,it is a logical fallacy because atheism or non-belief has nothing to know what is moral or not.
So stop borrowing from God to make a point about what you think is right or wrong,you cannot borrow from a God you reject and don't believe in.You atheists and nonbelievers prove the bible in Romans true by doing it because it tells us in Romans that God wrote his laws in every person's heart and atheists prove it true every time they borrow from God to make a point about morality in order to judge people who are sinners and know they need a savior because of it and call their self a Christian.
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 2:22 am
by Kenny
I believe it was Jesus who said "A tree is known by the fruit it bears" It seems lately Islam has been producing some very bitter, and intolerant fruit. Is it the religion that's the problem? Or something else. When I look at a country like India who has more Muslims than any other country in the world, yet we don't see the Islamic craziness in India that we see in some of the others.... perhaps it's because in India they are kept under control (to an extent). It seems most of the craziness is in the Middle East when they are often allowed to run the country and enact Sharia law (Islamic theocracy) I am not familiar with any other countries that have theocracy laws other than Islamic countries; but if there were, do you suppose with enough time other religions would produce such bitter fruit like Islam does if they were given the power to run countries the way Islam does? In other words; is this a Theocracy problem? Or is it an Islamic Theocracy problem.
Ken
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 8:26 am
by PaulSacramento
Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:Audie wrote:Shall we quote from the Koran on the desirability of killing jews?
The Koran is actually quite sympathetic towards Jews and Christians, even calling them "the people of the Book". (The "Book" being the Bible.)
Moreover, the Koran recognizes Israel's right to the land of Israel as a
divine right. My guess is that God allowed the perversion that is Islam but embedded within the koranic text His promise to Abram regarding the land.
Modern Muslims conveniently ignore these references in their "holy" book, just as rabbinical Judaism conveniently ignores the obvious references to Jesus written 700 years before His arrival on the world scene.
FL
Yes, BUT, the Koran is very clear that it is also acceptable to kill those that are unbelievers and to convert via force.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran ... olence.htm
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 8:57 am
by B. W.
Audie wrote:Jac3510 wrote:The babystep is still an unjustified logical leap, and it is one in you, and in any case, your present aggression is coming from somewhere. Still praying for you, Audie. I hope your day improves.
Science =good, religion =bad is something you made up to attribute to me. How seriously stupid do feel its appropriate to claim someone is?
I dont like you now, I never did. See if you can guess why. "My aggression"? I was not addressing you when you chose to interject your tendentious falsehood. Then you dont even have it in you to take ownership of your own lie.
As for your "prayer"-
Save the smarm for yourself.
Audie, you did say this...
Audie wrote:Science did win the moon, religion did give us 911. What sort of logic does it require to get around that?
And do you not think that this certainly implies
Science=good, religion=bad point of view? You did write this, did you not?
How can one logically deduce any other meaning from your own comment?
Can you honestly see that you chose a poor choice of words?
-
-
-
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 9:15 am
by Audie
B. W. wrote:Audie wrote:Jac3510 wrote:The babystep is still an unjustified logical leap, and it is one in you, and in any case, your present aggression is coming from somewhere. Still praying for you, Audie. I hope your day improves.
Science =good, religion =bad is something you made up to attribute to me. How seriously stupid do feel its appropriate to claim someone is?
I dont like you now, I never did. See if you can guess why. "My aggression"? I was not addressing you when you chose to interject your tendentious falsehood. Then you dont even have it in you to take ownership of your own lie.
As for your "prayer"-
Save the smarm for yourself.
Audie, you did say this...
Audie wrote:Science did win the moon, religion did give us 911. What sort of logic does it require to get around that?
And do you not think that this certainly implies
Science=good, religion=bad point of view? You did write this, did you not?
How can one logically deduce any other meaning from your own comment?
Can you honestly see that you chose a poor choice of words?
-
-
-
It clearly implies that which certain persons wish to think it implies.
If you are going to criticize choice or words, perhaps you, in the interest of some sort of balance,should look at someone putting dimwit words in my mouth for me.
Try this:
"Politics gives us campaign signs on lawns".
Please identify where good or bad is clearly implied.
Also, if possible, how this can logically be construed to mean that is a summary comment on politics.
Which part of the quote, "science gave us the moon landing" is not true? Allowing for its a short hand way of speaking, as opposed to some treatise full of definitions.
Which part of "religion gave us 911" is less true than "politics gives us campaign signs"?
You guys are fond of the line "Who'd die for a lie?" when speaking of martyrs.
Our 911 boys presumably went to their death saying something about "allah akhbar"
and counting virgins, not mulling the fine points of US middle eastern policy.
Motivation, and all.
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 12:57 pm
by abelcainsbrother
You guys are fond of the line "Who'd die for a lie?" when speaking of martyrs.
Yes! Because nobody is willing to die for a lie,they die for what they believe is true just like Islamic terrorists,they believe it is true about the virgins.Therefore Christianity cannot be a made up religion based on lies because the followers of Jesus who were killed for preaching about Jesus rising from the dead were willing to die in order to preach about Jesus and how he died and rose again to save you.Your point actually is evidence Christianity is true,people are willing to die for truth.
Re: Why US non-believers must reject Islamophobic 'New Athei
Posted: Fri Mar 27, 2015 1:24 pm
by RickD
abelcainsbrother wrote:You guys are fond of the line "Who'd die for a lie?" when speaking of martyrs.
Yes! Because nobody is willing to die for a lie,they die for what they believe is true just like Islamic terrorists,they believe it is true about the virgins.Therefore Christianity cannot be a made up religion based on lies because the followers of Jesus who were killed for preaching about Jesus rising from the dead were willing to die in order to preach about Jesus and how he died and rose again to save you.Your point actually is evidence Christianity is true,people are willing to die for truth.
Huh?
With that logic, jim jones was Jesus Christ.
