CDZ Islamification of The West

[Carla_Danger]

You did not answer at all. You cited that Christ came to fulfill the Law and prophets. The Law is the Ten Commandments, which Christ did not break and the Prophets, which foretold his coming. So, you have no idea of why both Testaments are in the Bible. Fortunately, I did answer that question earlier in the thread.

Were Moses and Joshua prophets?

Please stay on topic.
Start a thread about the bible if that's what you want to discuss.
Thanks.

Oh, religion is the topic of this thread. It's not off topic to compare Christianity to Islam.

do you know today's differences?

Why don't you tell us the difference.

Tea Party Candidate Says It's OK To Stone Gays To Death

 

[GaryDog]

pillars repeatedly stated that she does not like islam. jc45 states that the left is in love with islam.

countering islamophobic rants and fearmongering does not equal being on the muslims' side. it just shows that the poster is not on the side of the ranter and fearmonger. this is basic stuff.

nor is not knowing what the argument is actually about. Which party is currently fighting for the rights of islamics?

Any party fighting for the rights of all U.S. citizens under the Constitution is a party fighting for "islamics".

FYI, "Islamics" isn't a word.

woahhhhh there, who said anything about US citizens here. You've jumped the road. Bringing islamics into this country is not bringing in US citizens. so, do you wish to try again?

Did you know that U.S. citizens are not the only group that have rights under the constitution?

not if they're not here.

Well if they're not here, then I'm not sure what the discussion is about when you bring up the issue of Americans and rights.

 

[L.K.Eder]

pillars repeatedly stated that she does not like islam. jc45 states that the left is in love with islam.

countering islamophobic rants and fearmongering does not equal being on the muslims' side. it just shows that the poster is not on the side of the ranter and fearmonger. this is basic stuff.

nor is not knowing what the argument is actually about. Which party is currently fighting for the rights of islamics?

Any party fighting for the rights of all U.S. citizens under the Constitution is a party fighting for "islamics".

FYI, "Islamics" isn't a word.

woahhhhh there, who said anything about US citizens here. You've jumped the road. Bringing islamics into this country is not bringing in US citizens. so, do you wish to try again?

Did you know that U.S. citizens are not the only group that have rights under the constitution?

not if they're not here.

if "they're not here", then it follows that they were not brought into the US.

 

[Coyote]

It is "factual" that individual Muslims have committed terrorist acts in Europe.
It is also "factual" that individual Jews controlled much of Europe's banking system, to the detriment of the average German citizen.

It is no more "factual" that all Muslims bear responsibility for terrorists than it is that all Jews bear responsibility for the economic actions of a few.

Yes, I am sure German reparations post WWI had nothing to do with inflation for Germany.

Jews run a lot of parades celebrating Jewish Holidays in Germany then?

What is wrong with that?

 

[jc456]

You did not answer at all. You cited that Christ came to fulfill the Law and prophets. The Law is the Ten Commandments, which Christ did not break and the Prophets, which foretold his coming. So, you have no idea of why both Testaments are in the Bible. Fortunately, I did answer that question earlier in the thread.

Were Moses and Joshua prophets?

Please stay on topic.
Start a thread about the bible if that's what you want to discuss.
Thanks.

Oh, religion is the topic of this thread. It's not off topic to compare Christianity to Islam.

do you know today's differences?

Why don't you tell us the difference.

Tea Party Candidate Says It's OK To Stone Gays To Death

since when is the tea party a religious group?

And I notice you didn't give the difference? What say you?

 

[Tilly]

In response to Lucy's question in the OP, the ICM poll cited several times already, found that 32% of UK muslims refuse to condemn those who take part in violence against those who mock muhammed.

 

[GaryDog]

Were Moses and Joshua prophets?

Please stay on topic.
Start a thread about the bible if that's what you want to discuss.
Thanks.

Oh, religion is the topic of this thread. It's not off topic to compare Christianity to Islam.

do you know today's differences?

Why don't you tell us the difference.

Tea Party Candidate Says It's OK To Stone Gays To Death

since when is the tea party a religious group?

And I notice you didn't give the difference? What say you?

Since 2009, roughly.

 

[jc456]

nor is not knowing what the argument is actually about. Which party is currently fighting for the rights of islamics?

Any party fighting for the rights of all U.S. citizens under the Constitution is a party fighting for "islamics".

FYI, "Islamics" isn't a word.

woahhhhh there, who said anything about US citizens here. You've jumped the road. Bringing islamics into this country is not bringing in US citizens. so, do you wish to try again?

Did you know that U.S. citizens are not the only group that have rights under the constitution?

not if they're not here.

if "they're not here", then it follows that they were not brought into the US.

and yet the libs are fighting to get them here. Right? Or did I just imagine the last five months?

 

[jc456]

Please stay on topic.
Start a thread about the bible if that's what you want to discuss.
Thanks.

Oh, religion is the topic of this thread. It's not off topic to compare Christianity to Islam.

do you know today's differences?

Why don't you tell us the difference.

Tea Party Candidate Says It's OK To Stone Gays To Death

since when is the tea party a religious group?

And I notice you didn't give the difference? What say you?

Since 2009, roughly.

hmmmm who is their god?

 

[flacaltenn]

After Warnings from other Moderators -- there is STILL too much personal bickering going on since 10:25 when DontTazMeBro was in here cleaning up..

Do NOT make it personal in even any TINY way.. If you do -- you will be ejected.. No more cleaning up after you..
I'm leaving thread closed for 10 minutes so that folks don't miss this note.

 

[flacaltenn]

bump.. No more clean-ups...

 

[saveliberty]

I brought a mop...

The chief antagonist did not make a valid point and admitted Muslims were intolerant. Probably the best I am going to see. Later

 

[GaryDog]

In response to Lucy's question in the OP, the ICM poll cited several times already, found that 32% of UK muslims refuse to condemn those who take part in violence against those who mock muhammed.

There is no doubt a problem in the Muslim community with extremism.

It does not follow that we should wholesale reject refugees fleeing from said extremism.

 

[GaryDog]

Oh, religion is the topic of this thread. It's not off topic to compare Christianity to Islam.

do you know today's differences?

Why don't you tell us the difference.

Tea Party Candidate Says It's OK To Stone Gays To Death

since when is the tea party a religious group?

And I notice you didn't give the difference? What say you?

Since 2009, roughly.

hmmmm who is their god?

The one from the bible, obviously.

 

[GaryDog]

Any party fighting for the rights of all U.S. citizens under the Constitution is a party fighting for "islamics".

FYI, "Islamics" isn't a word.

woahhhhh there, who said anything about US citizens here. You've jumped the road. Bringing islamics into this country is not bringing in US citizens. so, do you wish to try again?

Did you know that U.S. citizens are not the only group that have rights under the constitution?

not if they're not here.

if "they're not here", then it follows that they were not brought into the US.

and yet the libs are fighting to get them here. Right? Or did I just imagine the last five months?

It's more accurate to say that right-wing extremists are fighting to keep them out.

It's pretty standard throughout history for the U.S. to accept refugees from war-torn countries -- particularly when it was our intervention that basically caused their refugee status.

 

[Coyote]

the Muslim-majority countries like Saudi Arabia, where there is no freedom of religion or tolerance.

......Which places your continuous defense of any and all things Islamic in their proper context.

You do so knowing that it will lead to a destruction of freedom of religion and tolerance.

I don't defend "any and all things" Islamic. I defend freedom of religion and tolerance for other faiths, how ever much we may dislike them. I also oppose broadbrushing all members of a faith as is often done when discussing religion.

The trouble is, I see the same lack of tolerance here that is attributed to the Muslims. If we value our rights and freedoms then they must exist equally for all members of our society as long as they follow the laws of our country.

Once you start placing restrictions on those rights, based not on individual actions, but on beliefs or percieved beliefs, then you endanger the entire foundation of our country.

I know what the automatic answer is going to be: but they're endangering OUR society, rights and values. No. They aren't unless they are committing criminal acts and in that case, it's up to the legal process to sort that out like any other criminal. This is an age-old argument that has come up with every major immigrant influx into the U.S. and yet, here we are, stronger than ever in our ethnic diversity and shared values.

 

[Alex.]

Nice try at rationalization.

Today it is happening in the name of Allah.

Not at all.

The point stands. Prior to domestication, seperating religion from government - there was little tolerance in either the Christian dominated world or the Islamic dominated world.

But don't you find it ironic that the first thing that comes out of people's mouths when it comes to Muslims is....but but they lop peoples heads off!...meanwhile their own legislatures are discussing bringing back the electric chair and they don't seem to have a problem with that.

The OP is discussing today, I am discussing today.

Today it is happening in the name of Allah.

In the name of terrorists claiming to speak for Allah. Why are you validating terrorists?

Not

You're saying the same thing they are: That they're doing this in the name of Allah. How is that not validation?

Saying it is in the name of one thing or another does not validate nor does it condone the unacceptable and barbaric action.

 

[Coyote]

So, tolerating Islam in western nations will lead to the destruction of freedom of religion?

How?

Perhaps you need to review how other religions fare along side Islam in Islamic nations, then come back and join the discussion.

Does that mean we should incorporate a similar low standard when it comes to freedom of religion?

 

[Tilly]

In response to Lucy's question in the OP, the ICM poll cited several times already, found that 32% of UK muslims refuse to condemn those who take part in violence against those who mock muhammed.

There is no doubt a problem in the Muslim community with extremism.

It does not follow that we should wholesale reject refugees fleeing from said extremism.

Who has rejected them? Germany alone took 1.6 M.

 

[Coyote]

......Which places your continuous defense of any and all things Islamic in their proper context.

You do so knowing that it will lead to a destruction of freedom of religion and tolerance.

So, tolerating Islam in western nations will lead to the destruction of freedom of religion?

How?

Tolerating the ultimate intolerance is not actually furthering tolerance.

It is simple abetting intolerance.


As Islam grows and spreads, tolerance diminishes. Islam is all ABOUT intolerance, since it was created as a quasi-religious totalitarian political system that wages continual war on all other ways of life.

Are you arguing against freedom of religion?