Global Image of Islam ...

[Xue Sheng]

Be The Uncarved Block...or else.

:lol:

Those who know, do not speak; those who speak, don't do so well.

 

[JohnEdward]

When Islam is criticized, people always say 'oh you want to kill all Muslim'. No! Or if Christianity is criticized, you hear 'You think Christians are stupid'. No!

We target "Islam". We target the Quran. It directly says in there: there is a supernatural god and it wants you to kill people who don't believe like you do. (amongst other ridiculous things) And waddaya know? People actually believe this and act on it.

I don't understand why I have to respect this.

because they'd kill you if you don't?

 

[granfire]

Well, to be fair, Bob didn't specify gender, so you might have the rights to your reverie back, Jenna .

nah, he said at one time he didn't like doing nekked guys. He would have to ask the Missus to do that.


(no, wait, nekked chicks coming by and you want to go to bed?!)

 

[Bob Hubbard]

nah, he said at one time he didn't like doing nekked guys. He would have to ask the Missus to do that.


(no, wait, nekked chicks coming by and you want to go to bed?!)

What can I say, I'm old and tired enough that sleeps a priority and boobies aint, LOL.


Back on topic though, one can argue that Islam is bad, that there are bad (by our standards) things in it, and that people use it as a reason to do bad things.
Fine.
But don't ***** when someone points out that the -same- is true of other faiths.
Joseph Smith for example, married a number of 15 and 16 year olds. That was less than 200 years ago.
At least 1 US President married a 16 year old as well. (Again, less than 200 years ago).
The age of marriage consent in some parts of the US is under 12 (with the kids parents permission). That's today.
So someone 1400 years ago marrying someone in the range of 6-13, when the average life expectancy was mid-30's, is not unusual.
Does the idea disgust us today? Sure does. But that's by our standards, not the standards of the day.
Kids today are getting their periods at age 7-8. According to "Mother Nature" that means she's ready for action. Or "God" if you will.
So, maybe our standard is wrong and natures is right. Or not.


Ok, "Kill the Unbelievers".
It's in the Christian Bible. We've discussed this before.

Kill the gays.
Ditto.

"Christians don't do the **** Muslims do."
Billycaca. They have, they do, and it's been cited.

"Muslims are high risk".
More Billycaca. Walk through ChiTown, I bet it's not an Muslim that rolls ya. It's not Muslims lopping off heads in Cancun. Catholics maybe. In some areas, they are. In some they aren't, and understanding the actual risk factors and not the FUD thats pushed out is important. I'd rather know the -real- risk factors than run around in a panic.

"Bob, you're just making excuses"
Humbug. You're just being paranoid. Unlike a certain Captain Solo, I love to know the odds, and the odds say I'll win the lottery before I have to worry about Islamic Terrorism. I'm more likely to get cancer from a TSA screening.

"Bob, you're an idiot".
Yup, and making my 3rd run for the White House. Vote Pizza Party in 2012. We may not be perfect, but we make a hella good pie.

 

[elder999]

no, he married her at 6, consumated it at 9.

and yes we know, yo defend those actions

No, I don't defend them-I place them in cultural context. Otherwise, I'd have to condemn the Catholics for all the depredations of various popes, the entire populace of Mexico for the actions of the Aztecs, the entrie populace of Spain for the Spanish conquests of the New World and imposition of that evil Catholicism wherever they went, the entire populace of Poylnesians, Melanesians, and the tribes of Borneo for cannibalism, all Jews for the evil depravity of King David, all Mormons for the Mormon war and raids of 1857, and all Texans-including you-for the unforgivable sin of slave trading conducted by the likes of Jim Bowie.

You do see the logical disconnect, so much more eloquently expressed by Bob, don't you?

Such marriages were common in a variety of cultures at the time, roughly 600 ****ing A.D., for ****'s sake-especially amongst the Bedouin tribes of which Mohammad was a member. it was thought to be the safest demonstration of virginity, of all things. Arabs did it, Europeans did it, Asians did it. It was not the norm, but it did happen-hence hundreds of years of discussion about whether Aisha was actually six, or nine, or, in some instances, nineteen. For the record, sure-married at six, consummated at nine, and that's just icky, and a crime-but it wasn't either of those things 1400 years ago.

If, on the other hand, you should choose to condemn those adherents of Islam who might condone behavior like the Prophet's for men of today, I'm with you.

 

[Jenna]

We've discussed this before.

...pretty much sums it up for me. Only I would suffix "in the same way as before, and probably with the same outcome as before. Or lack of."

 

[Twin Fist]

i hate you a little

No kidding. I have to go shoot naked calendar models in 55 minutes and all I want to do is go back to bed.

 

[JohnEdward]

What can I say, I'm old and tired enough that sleeps a priority and boobies aint, LOL.


Back on topic though, one can argue that Islam is bad, that there are bad (by our standards) things in it, and that people use it as a reason to do bad things.
Fine.
But don't ***** when someone points out that the -same- is true of other faiths.
Joseph Smith for example, married a number of 15 and 16 year olds. That was less than 200 years ago.
At least 1 US President married a 16 year old as well. (Again, less than 200 years ago).
The age of marriage consent in some parts of the US is under 12 (with the kids parents permission). That's today.
So someone 1400 years ago marrying someone in the range of 6-13, when the average life expectancy was mid-30's, is not unusual.
Does the idea disgust us today? Sure does. But that's by our standards, not the standards of the day.
Kids today are getting their periods at age 7-8. According to "Mother Nature" that means she's ready for action. Or "God" if you will.
So, maybe our standard is wrong and natures is right. Or not.


Ok, "Kill the Unbelievers".
It's in the Christian Bible. We've discussed this before.

Kill the gays.
Ditto.

"Christians don't do the **** Muslims do."
Billycaca. They have, they do, and it's been cited.

"Muslims are high risk".
More Billycaca. Walk through ChiTown, I bet it's not an Muslim that rolls ya. It's not Muslims lopping off heads in Cancun. Catholics maybe. In some areas, they are. In some they aren't, and understanding the actual risk factors and not the FUD thats pushed out is important. I'd rather know the -real- risk factors than run around in a panic.

"Bob, you're just making excuses"
Humbug. You're just being paranoid. Unlike a certain Captain Solo, I love to know the odds, and the odds say I'll win the lottery before I have to worry about Islamic Terrorism. I'm more likely to get cancer from a TSA screening.

"Bob, you're an idiot".
Yup, and making my 3rd run for the White House. Vote Pizza Party in 2012. We may not be perfect, but we make a hella good pie.

Agreed I was going to go into that in length but opted for my Amish remark I made "Really makes the Amish radical visionaries and revolutionaries, and that really is appealing." I think monotheistic religion, starting off with Judaism was very barbaric with the stoning for going to pray to the wrong god, etc. all the stories of killing and conquering and killing those not like you, killing if you didn't follow this or that law, God killing, and more killing of damn-near everything but the vegetation. Christianity less barbaric, but still when tied to Judaism solving problems by killing. Muslim skipped Christ's perspective and took off where the Jews ended. That is why they are all still fighting to day because they still feel killing is the answer to the problem. And is why, abortion doctors where killed some years ago, and bombing of those clinics, cause some Christian still adhere to the ancient barbaric ways of the middle east culture, just as Muslim extremist do with terrorist groups and the Jewish government with their war; which the Palestinians do too equally. It is the people that shape that. They could abandon violence but their social and ancient religious dogma doesn't permit it. It doesn't tell them so other than parts of Christianity where Jesus models peace and even that is mixed into violence as a solution enough to justify Christian violence and all the kill done in the name of God, umm...and not Jesus. See the over ride there.

The thing that has lessened the ode to killing in the Jews and the Christian is secularism, and modernization of society. Whereas the Muslims (those in the land of it's origin per se) have become more fanatical because of secularism and modernization white knuckling the their culture and religion. Yea, it helps to pull your head out of the sandbox and look around at the rest of the world seeing that you no longer ruler of what was your world at that time. I known Muslims who have updated themselves to the world, and like many modern non-montheistic fanatics don't see killing as a solution. They realize the power of democracy, and education. I wouldn't fear them. Who I fear is the extremists who still subscribe to killing as the solution to everything. Who don't want to modernize etc. Be they Jew, Christian or Muslim.

Right now we are dealing with the Muslim extremists lost in time, who don't realize they can't win against change now. They did for thousands of years, but global and modernization secession is creeping in. Something they will not be able to kill to solve what they is a problem. There cultural and life style will change. Their religion will change. Just as it has and is for Jews and Christians. Talk to the Christian agrarian sects who have been struggling really hard to preserve their way of life the last 40 years.

In part what I see these wars we have will do, it forces contact with the outside, it shows the change is coming and they can't fight it. Because it is already happening. I see Iranian Muslim refugees here fresh on this soil in traditional dress, and in less than three months modify that dress to a moderate dress. I have seen some transform to soccer moms as well. Of course you have holds out. But the fact is change is already happening. In time this threat will be far less great as it is now. I have always said, since back in the 1970s with Ayatollah whats his face, we don't need to bomb them and wipe them off the face of the earth. What we need is to bomb them with is strip malls, fast food, and disneyland.

 

[JohnEdward]

No, I don't defend them-I place them in cultural context. Otherwise, I'd have to condemn the Catholics for all the depredations of various popes, the entire populace of Mexico for the actions of the Aztecs, the entrie populace of Spain for the Spanish conquests of the New World and imposition of that evil Catholicism wherever they went, the entire populace of Poylnesians, Melanesians, and the tribes of Borneo for cannibalism, all Jews for the evil depravity of King David, all Mormons for the Mormon war and raids of 1857, and all Texans-including you-for the unforgivable sin of slave trading conducted by the likes of Jim Bowie.

You do see the logical disconnect, so much more eloquently expressed by Bob, don't you?

Such marriages were common in a variety of cultures at the time, roughly 600 ****ing A.D., for ****'s sake-especially amongst the Bedouin tribes of which Mohammad was a member. it was thought to be the safest demonstration of virginity, of all things. Arabs did it, Europeans did it, Asians did it. It was not the norm, but it did happen-hence hundreds of years of discussion about whether Aisha was actually six, or nine, or, in some instances, nineteen. For the record, sure-married at six, consummated at nine, and that's just icky, and a crime-but it wasn't either of those things 1400 years ago.

If, on the other hand, you should choose to condemn those adherents of Islam who might condone behavior like the Prophet's for men of today, I'm with you.

Dang you falling a heck of a hammer. But you forgot to include Africa on all counts of child marriage and others atrocities of it's own people from early on to the point of feeding the slave trade and beyond that you would otherwise condemn.

 

[Twin Fist]

this

When Islam is criticized, people always say 'oh you want to kill all Muslim'. No! Or if Christianity is criticized, you hear 'You think Christians are stupid'. No!

We target "Islam". We target the Quran. It directly says in there: there is a supernatural god and it wants you to kill people who don't believe like you do. (amongst other ridiculous things) And waddaya know? People actually believe this and act on it.

I don't understand why I have to respect this.

 

[Twin Fist]

if you dont see a difference between 6 and 16, you are in for a rude awakening

Joseph Smith for example, married a number of 15 and 16 year olds. That was less than 200 years ago.

 

[Tez3]

Agreed I was going to go into that in length but opted for my Amish remark I made "Really makes the Amish radical visionaries and revolutionaries, and that really is appealing." I think monotheistic religion, starting off with Judaism was very barbaric with the stoning for going to pray to the wrong god, etc. all the stories of killing and conquering and killing those not like you, killing if you didn't follow this or that law, God killing, and more killing of damn-near everything but the vegetation. Christianity less barbaric, but still when tied to Judaism solving problems by killing. Muslim skipped Christ's perspective and took off where the Jews ended. That is why they are all still fighting to day because they still feel killing is the answer to the problem. And is why, abortion doctors where killed some years ago, and bombing of those clinics, cause some Christian still adhere to the ancient barbaric ways of the middle east culture, just as Muslim extremist do with terrorist groups and the Jewish government with their war; which the Palestinians do too equally. It is the people that shape that. They could abandon violence but their social and ancient religious dogma doesn't permit it. It doesn't tell them so other than parts of Christianity where Jesus models peace and even that is mixed into violence as a solution enough to justify Christian violence and all the kill done in the name of God, umm...and not Jesus. See the over ride there.

The thing that has lessened the ode to killing in the Jews and the Christian is secularism, and modernization of society. Whereas the Muslims (those in the land of it's origin per se) have become more fanatical because of secularism and modernization white knuckling the their culture and religion. Yea, it helps to pull your head out of the sandbox and look around at the rest of the world seeing that you no longer ruler of what was your world at that time. I known Muslims who have updated themselves to the world, and like many modern non-montheistic fanatics don't see killing as a solution. They realize the power of democracy, and education. I wouldn't fear them. Who I fear is the extremists who still subscribe to killing as the solution to everything. Who don't want to modernize etc. Be they Jew, Christian or Muslim.

Right now we are dealing with the Muslim extremists lost in time, who don't realize they can't win against change now. They did for thousands of years, but global and modernization secession is creeping in. Something they will not be able to kill to solve what they is a problem. There cultural and life style will change. Their religion will change. Just as it has and is for Jews and Christians. Talk to the Christian agrarian sects who have been struggling really hard to preserve their way of life the last 40 years.

In part what I see these wars we have will do, it forces contact with the outside, it shows the change is coming and they can't fight it. Because it is already happening. I see Iranian Muslim refugees here fresh on this soil in traditional dress, and in less than three months modify that dress to a moderate dress. I have seen some transform to soccer moms as well. Of course you have holds out. But the fact is change is already happening. In time this threat will be far less great as it is now. I have always said, since back in the 1970s with Ayatollah whats his face, we don't need to bomb them and wipe them off the face of the earth. What we need is to bomb them with is strip malls, fast food, and disneyland.

I don't think you understand Jewish law if you have taken it from Xtian books.
http://www.jewfaq.org/halakhah.htm

And what is the Jewish government? If you mean the Israeli government I'd point out there's Xtians and Muslims in it.

 

[JohnEdward]

I don't think you understand Jewish law if you have taken it from Xtian books.
http://www.jewfaq.org/halakhah.htm

And what is the Jewish government? If you mean the Israeli government I'd point out there's Xtians and Muslims in it.

I should have just kept my fingers off the keyboard, and stuck to the post that said, "Really makes the Amish radical visionaries and revolutionaries, and that really is appealing." to another comment.:hb:

This topic is such a complicated topic and a minefield. On top of the fact am not the most eloquent keyboardist, or qualified to delve into this topic as I did. :duh:

And sometimes you get in over your head, and only way out is to run.....am running.

 

[elder999]

Dang you falling a heck of a hammer. But you forgot to include Africa on all counts of child marriage and others atrocities of it's own people from early on to the point of feeding the slave trade and beyond that you would otherwise condemn.

Well, no, I didn't.

I left out a wide swath of man's inhumanity to his fellow man-it's the human condition, always has been, probably always will: the earth is one great big supparating, pus-filled wound of misery-a ball of dirt, encrusted with the bones of men.

And why is it that people have to bring up the whole "but the Africans practiced slavery and took part in the trade" thing every time the subject comes up, as if that excuses the whole of Europe and the United States from doing so? Or as though the "Africans" were one single tribe or nation, or thought of themselves as such?

 

[JohnEdward]

Well, no, I didn't.

I left out a wide swath of man's inhumanity to his fellow man-it's the human condition, always has been, probably always will: the earth is one great big supparating, pus-filled wound of misery-a ball of dirt, encrusted with the bones of men.

And why is it that people have to bring up the whole "but the Africans practiced slavery and took part in the trade" thing every time the subject comes up, as if that excuses the whole of Europe and the United States from doing so? Or as though the "Africans" were one single tribe or nation, or thought of themselves as such?

Head scratch.....ummm....you said

Otherwise, I'd have to condemn the Catholics for all the depredations of various popes, the entire populace of Mexico for the actions of the Aztecs, the entrie populace of Spain for the Spanish conquests of the New World and imposition of that evil Catholicism wherever they went, the entire populace of Poylnesians, Melanesians, and the tribes of Borneo for cannibalism, all Jews for the evil depravity of King David, all Mormons for the Mormon war and raids of 1857, and all Texans-including you-for the unforgivable sin of slave trading conducted by the likes of Jim Bowie.

And you left out Africa, Africa is a pretty big continent like the Egyptians possibly could be condemn for their treatment of Jews... The conquering of the Berbers by Turks, Vandals, Romans, and Arabs who imposed Arabic culture, language and religion up them, erasing their culture. Then there is the wars of the Sudan, Ethiopia, etc. I didn't bring up slavery... my historical scope of slavery isn't the single condemnation of American slavery period; I didn't bring up Jim Bowie. Africa from north to south, east to west, has had slavery instituted longer than any other continent, fact is they did feed the slave trade you condemned. I just said you missed some things with that hammer of yours.

 

[elder999]

Head scratch.....ummm....you said


And you left out Africa, Africa is a pretty big continent like the Egyptians possibly could be condemn for their treatment of Jews... The conquering of the Berbers by Turks, Vandals, Romans, and Arabs who imposed Arabic culture, language and religion up them, erasing their culture. Then there is the wars of the Sudan, Ethiopia, etc. I didn't bring up slavery... my historical scope of slavery isn't the single condemnation of American slavery period; I didn't bring up Jim Bowie. Africa from north to south, east to west, has had slavery instituted longer than any other continent, fact is they did feed the slave trade you condemned. I just said you missed some things with that hammer of yours.

And I didn't bring up the Armenian genocide, either. I didn't miss anything-I just posted a few examples to make a point.

One you've apparently missed......

 

[JohnEdward]

And I didn't bring up the Armenian genocide, either. I didn't miss anything-I just posted a few examples to make a point.

One you've apparently missed......

I could have brought up the Japanese (WWII) Romans, Vandals, Vikings, Germans. What is your point? Then you had incomplete examples, and if you are going to blame people for terrible things, you just single out one specific thing and skim over the rest. African's who feed the slave trade, which was on an institution level on the continent, is equally as bad as everyone involved in the chain. You can't blame Gregor Strasser and not equally blame Rudolf Hess for contributing to Hitler's notorious and infamous deeds.

 

[elder999]

. You can't blame Gregor Strasser and not equally blame Rudolf Hess for contributing to Hitler's notorious and infamous deeds.

Nor can I blame the entire race of Germans-or Austrians.Nor should I. That's the point you've missed,again, apparently....

 

[JohnEdward]

Ok you didn't blame, you condemned, and you can't condemn a part and not the whole. No matter what. You said.

...for the unforgivable sin of slave trading conducted by the likes of Jim Bowie.

Would that include the likes of the Africans who fed the slave trade? Yes of course it would. They were at the start of the supply chain. They were upstream. They had been at slavery for centuries, before they seen a European. I didn't miss anything I was completing it providing more background, but you missed that too. :idunno:

 

[Tez3]

I should have just kept my fingers off the keyboard, and stuck to the post that said, "Really makes the Amish radical visionaries and revolutionaries, and that really is appealing." to another comment.:hb:

This topic is such a complicated topic and a minefield. On top of the fact am not the most eloquent keyboardist, or qualified to delve into this topic as I did. :duh:

And sometimes you get in over your head, and only way out is to run.....am running.

Many people think they understand Jewish law, beliefs and customs from reading the Bible when in fact it leaves them very far from the mark. I think most non Jews imagine we are the same as Xtians but without the Jesus bit. The same may well be true of Muslims.

Running is always a good option, nothing wrong with that better than digging a hole!