100% of terror is coming from followers of Islam.
100% of the terrorist are performing acts in the name of Islam.
100% of the acts are supported by the doctrine of Islam.
And, yet, the acts have nothing to do with Islam?
Shawn: sorry did I miss something. I didn't hear anyone link those events with Islam. If your point was "Not all terrorist are related to Islam" , that's correct. Oaklahoma city bomber, was not. And I'm sure their is more. I think the last 1:00 of the video I posted pretty much sums things up. Muslims only seem to be happy in places that are Non Muslim and when they move there they want to change the place into a version of the place they fled.
Thank you for pointing out the similarity between what thousands are doing in the name of Islam and a few have done because they are very sick in the head.
Now, the really sad thing is that Islamic Terrorists are not insane.
Now, the really sad thing is that Islamic Terrorists are not insane.
No they aren't. They know that America has soldiers on land that is typically considered their sovereign territory, including "holy land". They know we sell weapons to dictators, monarchies, and generally interfere with their own choices of governing to make sure we have stable access to their oil.
OTOH, we do need the oil, so sometimes you just have to do what you have to do. Then blame it 100% on their religion.
Fly don't forget to add the petro dollar system to the list of what our government protects.
That honestly is even more important then our own access to oil reserves.
No they aren't. They know that America has soldiers on land that is typically considered their sovereign territory, including "holy land". They know we sell weapons to dictators, monarchies, and generally interfere with their own choices of governing to make sure we have stable access to their oil.
OTOH, we do need the oil, so sometimes you just have to do what you have to do. Then blame it 100% on their religion.
What about Brussels, Paris, etc. They are killing people everywhere regardless of whether they are American in the name of their religion. Defend them and their "mindset" as much as you want but you need to take a step back and look at the facts.
I'm not defending their mindset. If you are too ignorant to actually spend the time to reflect on reality, then I guess you don't want to hear someone else spell it out for you. Reality needs no defense. Humans will always engage in conflict because somebody always controls more than somebody else. Religion is just a tool. It's not the reason.
100% of Nazis are Republicans
100% of KKK clan members are Republicans
100% of the terrorists who attack planned parenthood clinics are Republicans
100% of the terrorists who took over a nature reserve in order to force all that land we hunt on, atv on, camp on, and wakeboard on to be sold to private owners were Republicans.
100% of the people trying to legislate their religion on my children and I through BIG government force are Republicans.
and yet you want me to believe that some Republicans aren't bad.
There are many forms of terrorism, but we have linked the word terrorism with the Middle East. We end up only calling acts associated with people from the Middle East terrorist acts. We can call many things terrorism, but we reserve that for certain people.
Dane: the video you posted a link to is great. The debaters on both sides bring up great points and are very well spoken. I'm more then 1/2 way threw the video and would recommend it to others
I'm not defending their mindset. If you are too ignorant to actually spend the time to reflect on reality, then I guess you don't want to hear someone else spell it out for you. Reality needs no defense. Humans will always engage in conflict because somebody always controls more than somebody else. Religion is just a tool. It's not the reason.
I think you are giving them a little too much intellectual credit.
"Sunday's suicide bombing on a public park was claimed by the Pakistani Taliban's Jamaat-ur-Ahrar faction, which once declared loyalty to Islamic State. The group said it was targeting Christians."
There are many forms of terrorism, but we have linked the word terrorism with the Middle East. We end up only calling acts associated with people from the Middle East terrorist acts. We can call many things terrorism, but we reserve that for certain people.
We link that word to the middle east because as of recently we have several examples to support it. But we also referred to the Oklahoma City bombing as a "terrorist act".
I'm not exactly sure what the point of of the picture is. But if the purpose was to say that both of these women are the same, someone probably should have used a picture of the middle eastern woman not associating military with religion. Because yeah....she looks like a killer.
I think you are giving them a little too much intellectual credit.
"Sunday's suicide bombing on a public park was claimed by the Pakistani Taliban's Jamaat-ur-Ahrar faction, which once declared loyalty to Islamic State. The group said it was targeting Christians."
I don't give anyone who puts their religion above all else too much intellectual credit. It's completely absurd to think that all Islamic extremists are only doing what they do because of people having another religion. It's not surprising that they are targeting Christians because Christians represent the western world.
I'm guessing that since you posted this as your rationale that you believe that no terrorists have ever listed any complaints other than their victim's religion. Otherwise you would be trying to win an argument with deception if you knew otherwise. Is that the case? If so I would suggest that you do at least some research into the subject instead of listening to people trying to tool you.
Just for grins I googled "Osama bin laden complaints" and the 1st link was a wiki page, which just happened to have the quote below. Precisely one of the things I listed above although never having read that page.
"Bin Laden's stated motivations of the September 11 attacks include the support of Israel by the United States, the presence of the U.S. military in the Saudi Arabian borders, which he considered to be sacred Islamic territory"
Don't put words in my mouth. I never said all terrorist attacks are based on religion. I just simply pointed one out that was. That attack had nothing to do with power. Islam is the power religion in that territory and those christians had nothing to do with the west as they were their own people.
Don't put words in my mouth. I never said all terrorist attacks are based on religion. I just simply pointed one out that was. That attack had nothing to do with power. Islam is the power religion in that territory and those christians had nothing to do with the west as they were their own people.
I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm interpreting your words. Yes, there is an example of someone doing something terrible for about everything you can imagine. But I have to interpret your words in the context of the discussion. I don't know how you can say Christianity has nothing to do with the western culture. There are Muslims in all countries, but everyone knows that Islam is associated and originated in the ME.
Jesus: loving hippy
Jesus follower: Bombs innocent people in country halfway across the planet because they think their leader is coming for them, when it's more likely they'll be killed by a family member using a gun they bought to protect themselves.
Christianity isn't a religion of peace either. It's a religion where your sins are whitewashed and eternal life is a gift that requires nothing more than belief and lip service to a supernatural entity. What difference does it make that Jesus taught a religion of peace if the basic tenets of Christianity relegate his philosophy to a position of irrelevance?
All religions are fiction but that's another story. Most humans apparently need religion. Given the choice, Christianity is a pretty good one. Generally very good and very peaceful across the globe.
If you look at the "fundamentalist" percentages, the rates for any religion are about the same. The difference is the behavior resulting from the fundamental doctrine. In Christianty, you get folks pissed off about abortion and gays. In Islam, you get folk calling for Jihad and killing infidels.
If you want a religion of peace then Buddhism fits the bill way more than Islam or indeed Christianity. If you want to compare it to intoxicants:
Crack cocaine = Islam
Alcohol = Christianity
Pot = Buddhism.
I find it amazing people call Christianity "the religion of peace". Maybe at one time, like closer to the origin of the religion, but now (especially here in the south) it's the religion of intolerance and bigotry. Religion is nothing but a means of control and now we no longer have a distinction between being religious and nationalism. The leaders of these radical Islamic movement are exploiting the poor and deluded to carry out these terrorist attacks.
Go read the Bible. Look at the Ten Commandments and tell me where it endorses violence,hatred,bigotry or intolerance. There is no control in Christianity. Just loving your neighbors and helping the poor and needy. Those are a few rotten examples people use to spin their opinion. Every religion has bad apples (members) who hide behind the religion and justify their own actions in the name of their religion.
The 10 commandments is just 6 secular values and a few commands to discriminate against all other Gods and their choice of what day to celebrate. The common Christianity disclaimer is to ignore old testament God and also ignore what Jesus taught if you want as well. Because as long as you join us you are going to heaven. The rest of the religion you are feel to pick and choose as you please. Then insist that everyone else should be doing the same if yo want, but not required.
Come on JA, you're too smart to label an entire faith with that sort of logic that has never been taught or present in any church I've stepped into. Jesus kinda liked (and quoted) that OT God, so if you follow him then you better be on board as well. There is no OT vs. NT God or religion. You cannot understand the NT if you don't understand the OT.
Come on JA, you're too smart to label an entire faith with that sort of logic that has never been taught or present in any church I've stepped into. Jesus kinda liked (and quoted) that OT God, so if you follow him then you better be on board as well. There is no OT vs. NT God or religion. You cannot understand the NT if you don't understand the OT.
So does that mean that you think modern Christians should follow the OT scriptures exactly as they are written?
Has any Christian in recorded time followed the OT scriptures?
Off the top of of my head? Jesus himself jumps to mind...
Although I'm sure there have been others. I know of a few modern folks love to pluck a few OT verses when they're denouncing homosexuality.
Jesus made reference to the Law and Prophets as a unit, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill," (Matt. 5:17).
Jesus explained the Scriptures, "Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures," (NASB, Luke 24:27).
Jesus referred to the entire Canon by mentioning all the prophets from Abel (from Genesis, the first book and first martyr) to Zechariah (Chronicles, the last book, and the last martyr) (Matt. 23:35).
Yahweh is a disgusting jealous 5-year-old of a god who slaughters innocent babies among other atrocities and ridiculous behavior. Most Christians have outright rejected the OT (and for good reason) in practice. Sadly a lot of muslim countries are mired in the 14th century and haven't moved on the way Europe did.