ISIS

[Toyfarm]

http://www.youtube.com/embed/aYu_bHu6sUc?feature=player_embedded

[pearlblue1800]

" ISIS is Islam. "

No kidding,, what does the acronym ISIS represent ?

Strangely enough, the similarities between Islam and Christianity are overwhelming.
The only difference is in name, and historical timing..
Both have belief in the same sky god. Just by a different name. (like a pig with lipstick)
Christianity advocated the travelling to foreign lands and murdering those that do not convert. In the USA accusing citizens of witchcraft, and killing them, burning at the stake! Condoning SLAVERY.
Where these radicals, or supported by the reigning powers?
Remember the book of fables is full of atrocities, eg. condones the killing of children, rape, incest, complete genocide.

" With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
Steven Weinberg N.Y. Times Apr, 20, 1999

[azsandrider]

I think you can present your argument without deliberately being dis-respectful to others beliefs. You demean yourself and your position by the prose you chose to use.

[pearlblue1800]

Such as disrespecting the beliefs of Islam?
By referring to those that believe in that particular religion in a derogatory manner, replete with a video?


" With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
Steven Weinberg N.Y. Times Apr, 20, 1999

[azsandrider]

I was actually referring to your reference to 'sky gods' and such which is disrespectful to any devout religious person. And not all Muslims are terrorists and some may ride Goldwings.

I'm not religious and do not think there is any empirical evidence of a supernatural supreme being but I try not to disrespect other's beliefs in the discussion by being 'flippant' with titles.

Like I said, doing so cheapens your argument and the point you are making.

[Cruiseman]

The atrocities that you cite from Christians are hundreds of years old. The Salem witch trials were in the 17th century. I think the argument can be made the Christianity has "evolved". Besides, bad behavior by Christians in the past does not excuse bad behavior by Muslims in the present. As for the slavery reference, most the of the world, throughout history, practiced slavery, some still do to this day. It was common practice to take prisoners as slaves after conquering an enemy.

As for slavery in America (which was just one place where slavery was present at the time), the politically correct would have you believe that Americans hunted down Africans and took them as prisoners for a life of slavery. But, a little known and never talked about fact is that African slaves were originally purchased from African slave traders. Check Wikipedia:

The Atlantic slave traders were: the Portuguese, the British, the French, the Spanish, the Dutch Empire, and the United States. They had established outposts on the African coast where they purchased slaves from local African leaders.[3] Current estimates are that about 12 million Africans were shipped across the Atlantic,[4] although the number purchased by the traders is considerably higher.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade

Slavery was not a "Christian" crime, it was common practice among people of the time, regardless of their religion. And, let's not forget that America, a predominantly white, Christian country at the time, abolished slavery and freed the slaves.

[azsandrider]

It was the Republican Party who abolished slavery. The Democrat party was vehemently against the removal of slavery from the south.

I wonder why the minorities vote for the Democrats....Oh yeah, that part of the history is not routinely taught in schools...

[Westdc]

Slaves were needed - to build the New world-Reason -no machines were invented at that time to replace manual labor., Also there wasn't enough population for (free will) Labor.

[on the road]

Slaves were needed - to build the New world-Reason -no machines were invented at that time to replace manual labor., Also there wasn't enough population for (free will) Labor.

This place is beginning to take on the odor of elderly white southern redneck.

[Grandpa1]

This place is beginning to take on the odor of elderly, white, southern, redneck.

Then leave.

[hparsons]

Oh, don't go there. He's already said he was going to, and then revealed to all his honesty level.

[on the road]

Then leave.

Evolve

[Grandpa1]

Evolve

And be like you? No thanks.

[on the road]

And be like you? No thanks.

Try it.
You'll find that walking upright without your knuckles dragging on the ground is far more comfortable.

[Grandpa1]

Try it.
You'll find that walking upright without your knuckles dragging on the ground is far more comfortable.

I'm happy with it the way it is. It's easier to pick up stuff. Besides, it seems evolving causes you to lose how to use your brain.

[Grandpa1]

Hey OTR, I'm just playing around. No hard feelings! I respect everyone's right to believe what they want.

[on the road]

I'm happy with it the way it is. It's easier to pick up stuff. Besides, it seems evolving causes you to lose how to use your brain.

Maybe you're right and you've already reached your evolutionary plateau.
It's probably best just to stick to picking up stuff easily.

[Buckwing]

OTR,
Cruiseman made an on topic and lucid post. He even went to the trouble to post an outside source to lend credibility to his post. Yet you immediately resort to name calling in your reply. After doing that, you further devolve into single word answers. Are you feeling okay? Seriously, your posts aren't making sense. This could indicate a serious medical condition. I think you should seek help.

[hparsons]

Give OTR a break. Everyone does their best. That's a sample of his "best". You use what you got...

[hparsons]

" ISIS is Islam. "

No kidding,, what does the acronym ISIS represent ?

Strangely enough, the similarities between Islam and Christianity are overwhelming.
The only difference is in name, and historical timing..

So, you're saying one of the named religions did some awful things in the past, and has since changed; and the other is still doing awful things.

And you think they're the same?

I think you're really reaching now, but I also suspect you knew that when you posted the drivel. You know what's more barbaric than religion? A man who believes he is his own moral compass. Lots of examples of excess in those folks.

[pearlblue1800]

I find it difficult to support a or any 'religion' that condones invasion, rape, robbery, genocide, misogyny, incest, torturer eg; stoning, sexual discrimination, animal abuse, is always requiring money.
A religion that makes promises that can not be substantiated.
A religion that is full of contradictions, outright impossibilities. (winged horses, winged humans)
A religion that considers 'faith' to be a virtue. When everywhere else 'faith' is considered an absence of evidence. Otherwise the evidence would be trumpeted to all others.
A religion in which it's leaders are routinely accused and convicted of sex crimes and fraud. eg: Jehovah Witness, Catholic Church, FLDS

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/06/15/12225753-jehovahs-witnesses-ordered-to-pay-more-than-20-million-to-woman-who-said-she-was-sexually-abused?lite

A religion that is fined millions of dollars for such reprehensible acts leaving the victims to suffer for a lifetime. * see above
A religion which tries to influence government, denies scientific evidence and replaces it with dogma. * pick one any one
A religion that can not agree on many basic concepts, hence the plethora of different sects, *see Christianity for thousands of examples
A religion that claims to be the 'one true religion' with the one true god. * pick one, any one
A religion that threatens it's 'followers' if they do not adhere, they will suffer eternal damnation. * pick one, any one
A religion in which different denominations routinely kill those of opposing views, ie. Ireland-Northern Ireland Catholic vs. Protestant

Reaching you say?

"Awful things of the past" "has since changed"

I encourage you to read a few religious texts, in their entirety. Not just the ''feel good" parts
I guarantee you will find the information within them to be enlightening.

[srt8-in-largo]

Interesting times, huh.

For me, I have the most problems with American muslims than anywhere else. Where's the outrage and the condemnation of the atrocities from other muslims???

Muslims in Iraq and Turkey and whereever, on the other hand, who have stepped up and joined militias to fight ISIS ... I respect that the same as I respect our own troops.

[on the road]

Hey OTR, I'm just playing around. No hard feelings! I respect everyone's right to believe what they want.

No worries at all. Just playing back.

[hparsons]

I find it difficult to support a or any 'religion' that condones invasion, rape, robbery, genocide, misogyny, incest, torturer eg; stoning, sexual discrimination, animal abuse, is always requiring money.
A religion that makes promises that can not be substantiated.
A religion that is full of contradictions, outright impossibilities. (winged horses, winged humans)
A religion that considers 'faith' to be a virtue. When everywhere else 'faith' is considered an absence of evidence. Otherwise the evidence would be trumpeted to all others.
A religion in which it's leaders are routinely accused and convicted of sex crimes and fraud. eg: Jehovah Witness, Catholic Church, FLDS

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/06/15/12225753-jehovahs-witnesses-ordered-to-pay-more-than-20-million-to-woman-who-said-she-was-sexually-abused?lite

A religion that is fined millions of dollars for such reprehensible acts leaving the victims to suffer for a lifetime. * see above
A religion which tries to influence government, denies scientific evidence and replaces it with dogma. * pick one any one
A religion that can not agree on many basic concepts, hence the plethora of different sects, *see Christianity for thousands of examples
A religion that claims to be the 'one true religion' with the one true god. * pick one, any one
A religion that threatens it's 'followers' if they do not adhere, they will suffer eternal damnation. * pick one, any one
A religion in which different denominations routinely kill those of opposing views, ie. Ireland-Northern Ireland Catholic vs. Protestant

Reaching you say?

"Awful things of the past" "has since changed"

I encourage you to read a few religious texts, in their entirety. Not just the ''feel good" parts
I guarantee you will find the information within them to be enlightening.

Absolutely "reaching".

Substitute "species" for "religion" in all of your statements above, and the descriptions still fit concerning the human species. What you've outlined is a failure of humans as a species, not religion. You sound just a tad ... bitter.

However, there are many that have found solace in religion, and do good in the name of religion.

No one is asking you to "support" anything; but your rabid attitude is definitely "reaching", and sounds like it borders on psychotic.

[Wing_it]

Such as disrespecting the beliefs of Islam?
By referring to those that believe in that particular religion in a derogatory manner, replete with a video?

Don't you find it to be hypocritical that you support and promote referring to those who hold any religious belief by using derogatory matters after making the statement above?


" With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
Steven Weinberg N.Y. Times Apr, 20, 1999

Weinberg also stated in an essay "Without God" that: The worldview of science is rather chilling. Not only do we not find any point to life laid out for us in nature, no objective basis for our moral principles, no correspondence between what we think is the moral law and the laws of nature, of the sort imagined by philosophers from Anaximander and Plato to Emerson. We even learn that the emotions that we most treasure, our love for our wives and husbands and children, are made possible by chemical processes in our brains that are what they are as a result of natural selection acting on chancemutations of millions of years.

What is it that causes scientists to totally abandon logic and rational common sense? If, according to Weinberg, there is no objective basis for our moral principles how then does he even have a basis for stating that there are "good people doing good things" or "evil people doing evil things"? Would not all people simply be what they are due to chance? By this logic he believes in physics rather than God as a result of natural selection acting on chance. Just think had chance worked a little different Weinberg could have been another Billy Graham.

This reasoning is not only circular but self-defeating, yet many believe it.
The Natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians 2:14 ESV