|
Keep the discussion ON TOPIC. This thread is for discussing the terror attacks in Paris. |
On November 14 2015 12:26 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:25 m4ini wrote:On November 14 2015 12:15 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:14 m4ini wrote:That being said, my point is that if you haven't read the Quran, you have no basis to talk about what Islam does or does not teach. This of course applies to me too. A lot of hostility and misunderstanding is born because people have been spouting falsities towards something they actually have never read.
Wrong. Plain wrong. Even if he had read it, it's, like all religious books, all up for interpretation. To the point where both him and the cricket guy are both right and wrong at the same time. That would only ever work if there's no interpretation, or at least almost no interpretation of what you're reading. Read it first then interpret. You have no ground to stand on if you haven't read it in the first place. Or should I go around giving you my opinion of Harry Potter without having ever read it? + Show Spoiler +Don't worry, I actually read it and loved it all except for the final book.  One doesn't need to read it, my point is: cricketeer says, the Islam doesn't promote X. He might be right. Random arabic person tells me: it does promote X. He is as right as cricketeer is (sorry, if the name is spelled wrong). Both interpret something that is highly interpretable differently. Who's judging who's right? You can't. If i read it now, i might get to the same conclusion as random arabic person. Who's right then? It's up to interpretion. It's like having one of these ink-spill-pictures in school, one tells you "it's a butterfly", the other one says "a horsehead". It's neither, or both. Kinda hard to get my point across, but i hope you understand what i mean. Yes, you do need to read it. How can you possibly criticize ANYTHING without knowing what it actually is?
Excuse me, how many Christians have read the Bible cover to cover? How many Muslims have read the entire literature? How can you know you're not secretly a Mormon if you haven't read the entire Book of Mormon?
|
On November 14 2015 12:26 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:25 m4ini wrote:On November 14 2015 12:15 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:14 m4ini wrote:That being said, my point is that if you haven't read the Quran, you have no basis to talk about what Islam does or does not teach. This of course applies to me too. A lot of hostility and misunderstanding is born because people have been spouting falsities towards something they actually have never read.
Wrong. Plain wrong. Even if he had read it, it's, like all religious books, all up for interpretation. To the point where both him and the cricket guy are both right and wrong at the same time. That would only ever work if there's no interpretation, or at least almost no interpretation of what you're reading. Read it first then interpret. You have no ground to stand on if you haven't read it in the first place. Or should I go around giving you my opinion of Harry Potter without having ever read it? + Show Spoiler +Don't worry, I actually read it and loved it all except for the final book. One doesn't need to read it, my point is: cricketeer says, the Islam doesn't promote X. He might be right. Random arabic person tells me: it does promote X. He is as right as cricketeer is (sorry, if the name is spelled wrong). Both interpret something that is highly interpretable differently. Who's judging who's right? You can't. If i read it now, i might get to the same conclusion as random arabic person. Who's right then? It's up to interpretion. It's like having one of these ink-spill-pictures in school, one tells you "it's a butterfly", the other one says "a horsehead". It's neither, or both. Kinda hard to get my point across, but i hope you understand what i mean. Yes, you do need to read it. How can you possibly criticize ANYTHING without knowing what it actually is?
.. eh? Okay. Assume i've read it (i actually didn't, only parts of it after i almost got hit by a friend, after i touched the small quran he had hanging around his neck, 20 years ago). I come to the conclusion, that the highly interpretable book indeed is violent, sexist and "religion-racist (no idea what the word for that is).
That's the conclusion i have after reading it partially. What now? You, the person who actually didn't read it either completely, yet have a strong opinion, tell me to read the rest?
I totally understand the point you are making the only problem is that the only two results that you can logically expect from this are A)no one can have any opinion on any aspect of any religion "because its open to interpretation" or B)all parties are left with nothing but to agree to disagree, and at the end of the day, in so very many of these debates thats what ends up happening. You continue to believe what you believe about Islam, and I the same.
Thank you.
And it's btw not what i believe about Islam specifically. I said "fuck religion", not "fuck islam". The same stuff goes for all religions.
|
On November 14 2015 12:06 CrayonPopChoa wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 11:44 ahswtini wrote:On November 14 2015 11:42 Cricketer12 wrote:
This thread is proving the point I was making when I said it doesn't matter what moderates say/do. No matter what people will ONLY focus on the extremely small minority regardless of the fact 99.999% of us aren't doing this stuff. yes the 99.999% wont pick up a rifle and slaughter civilians. what do u think that number will drop to when u start asking how many people outright condemn these acts? I think everyone would agree that the people that carried out today's attacks are following some very misguided ideology. I also believe if the U.S. didnt bomb all the middle eastern countries for their oil, then they wouldn't have much need to hate us (the west) for our freedoms. Its a case of the chickens coming home to roost. Sometimes you just have to follow the trail of blood, and its a fact that the U.S. has spilled the most muslim blood on muslim soil in the past half-century. It dosent excuse any of the terrorist attacks, but at the same time maybe we need to wake up and ask ourselves are they really bombing us cause of our freedoms, or cause of our terrible foreign policy in that region, thats centered around rounding up their precious resources and bombing people back to the stone ages in the process. Would you expect some kid in Iraq who lost family or friends to condemn these attacks? You being in the U.S and I in Canada are really out of touch with the people over there. Its kind of like how we might look at a celebrity in Hollywood not being in touch with us. We are living privileged lives, we have safety, food, shelter, basic human needs that a lot of those people dont have. And a lot of that has to do with our countries bombing the fuck out of them. So I might get why some streets in muslims countries tomorrow will have kids burning french flags and shouting allah akbar. So you are right 99.999% of people wont condemn those attacks, but then again 99.9999% of americans dont condemn the wars in the middle east or the daily drone strikes.
The most muslims killed in the last half century have been killed by other muslims. It's not even close. That's the biggest reason support for terrorism has actually fallen in most Muslim countries, the people were turned off by the main victim of jihad being innocent muslim civilians. The rest of what you said is inaccurate. The west has bombed all those countries? All of them? Were the Muslim victims of terrorism killed because they were being imperialist? Why do jihadis treat people like the yazidis as subhuman? Supremacism and the abominable intolerable nature of the infidel is a big part of their ideology. They have their own motivations that they came up with all on their own without any help from you or me or anyone else, some of which have nothing to do with the west at all and which have the same result as the ones that do have something to do with the west: they kill a lot of people.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 14 2015 12:31 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:26 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:25 m4ini wrote:On November 14 2015 12:15 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:14 m4ini wrote:That being said, my point is that if you haven't read the Quran, you have no basis to talk about what Islam does or does not teach. This of course applies to me too. A lot of hostility and misunderstanding is born because people have been spouting falsities towards something they actually have never read.
Wrong. Plain wrong. Even if he had read it, it's, like all religious books, all up for interpretation. To the point where both him and the cricket guy are both right and wrong at the same time. That would only ever work if there's no interpretation, or at least almost no interpretation of what you're reading. Read it first then interpret. You have no ground to stand on if you haven't read it in the first place. Or should I go around giving you my opinion of Harry Potter without having ever read it? + Show Spoiler +Don't worry, I actually read it and loved it all except for the final book. One doesn't need to read it, my point is: cricketeer says, the Islam doesn't promote X. He might be right. Random arabic person tells me: it does promote X. He is as right as cricketeer is (sorry, if the name is spelled wrong). Both interpret something that is highly interpretable differently. Who's judging who's right? You can't. If i read it now, i might get to the same conclusion as random arabic person. Who's right then? It's up to interpretion. It's like having one of these ink-spill-pictures in school, one tells you "it's a butterfly", the other one says "a horsehead". It's neither, or both. Kinda hard to get my point across, but i hope you understand what i mean. Yes, you do need to read it. How can you possibly criticize ANYTHING without knowing what it actually is? Excuse me, how many Christians have read the Bible cover to cover? How many Muslims have read the entire literature? How can you know you're not secretly a Mormon if you haven't read the entire Book of Mormon?
You're just listing things that are irrelevant.
If a Christian hasn't read the bible cover to cover and espouses things from the bible that they've never read before, they're an idiot.
|
Bisutopia19372 Posts
Cricketer12, I just want to say I really respect the effort you are going through to post in this thread, share your view, and support your religion. That's all I wanted to say. 
|
On November 14 2015 12:31 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:26 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:25 m4ini wrote:On November 14 2015 12:15 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:14 m4ini wrote:That being said, my point is that if you haven't read the Quran, you have no basis to talk about what Islam does or does not teach. This of course applies to me too. A lot of hostility and misunderstanding is born because people have been spouting falsities towards something they actually have never read.
Wrong. Plain wrong. Even if he had read it, it's, like all religious books, all up for interpretation. To the point where both him and the cricket guy are both right and wrong at the same time. That would only ever work if there's no interpretation, or at least almost no interpretation of what you're reading. Read it first then interpret. You have no ground to stand on if you haven't read it in the first place. Or should I go around giving you my opinion of Harry Potter without having ever read it? + Show Spoiler +Don't worry, I actually read it and loved it all except for the final book. One doesn't need to read it, my point is: cricketeer says, the Islam doesn't promote X. He might be right. Random arabic person tells me: it does promote X. He is as right as cricketeer is (sorry, if the name is spelled wrong). Both interpret something that is highly interpretable differently. Who's judging who's right? You can't. If i read it now, i might get to the same conclusion as random arabic person. Who's right then? It's up to interpretion. It's like having one of these ink-spill-pictures in school, one tells you "it's a butterfly", the other one says "a horsehead". It's neither, or both. Kinda hard to get my point across, but i hope you understand what i mean. Yes, you do need to read it. How can you possibly criticize ANYTHING without knowing what it actually is? .. eh? Okay. Assume i've read it (i actually didn't, only parts of it after i almost got hit by a friend, after i touched the small quran he had hanging around his neck, 20 years ago). I come to the conclusion, that the highly interpretable book indeed is violent, sexist and "religion-racist (no idea what the word for that is). That's the conclusion i have after reading it partially. What now? You, the person who actually didn't read it either completely, yet have a strong opinion, tell me to read the rest?
OK fine, that's the opinion you gathered, you draw your examples from the Quran and real life that you think support your opinion and similarly I will do the same.
|
On November 14 2015 12:15 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:14 m4ini wrote:That being said, my point is that if you haven't read the Quran, you have no basis to talk about what Islam does or does not teach. This of course applies to me too. A lot of hostility and misunderstanding is born because people have been spouting falsities towards something they actually have never read.
Wrong. Plain wrong. Even if he had read it, it's, like all religious books, all up for interpretation. To the point where both him and the cricket guy are both right and wrong at the same time. That would only ever work if there's no interpretation, or at least almost no interpretation of what you're reading. Read it first then interpret. You have no ground to stand on if you haven't read it in the first place. Or should I go around giving you my opinion of Harry Potter without having ever read it? + Show Spoiler +Don't worry, I actually read it and loved it all except for the final book.
Souma, can you understand government if you haven't read every single law they passed? My point is, you can get some sense of an ideology even if you haven't read their scripture. I mean, I'd argue that Muslims are determined more so by their actions than by their holy scripture. And perhaps this should be made clear to you by what happened tonight. If you're willing to put that much weight on the Quran, then how the *fuck* do you explain that the people who did this were leaning on the Quran to justify their actions.
Actions speak louder than words. The Quran is words, an ideology. The actions of the people who committed tonight's atrocious acts are real life. And so are the actions of all the Muslims who didn't do any bullshit tonight. So what's that obsession with the scriptures, scriptures don't fucking kill anyone. I don't need the scriptures to gain some understanding of Islam. In fact, the scriptures themselves are a LOT less interesting than the interpretations of them that can be made. The hundreds of different interpretations, Souma... So don't tell people to read the Quran or the Bible, because if they did, the next thing they'd be told is that they fucking read it wrong.
|
Yes, I've read enough and studied enough of it that I can say I truly hate that "holy" books. I've parsed through too many religious hypocrisies and outright fallacies. One fallacy alone should be enough to break a book that should be perfection.
All religions were created by men to for self-serving reasons. That's why women are always treated as 2nd class citizens, or worse as cattle. This isn't the case in todays "Christianity" perhaps but the history of Christianity ?
The history of these religions and how they've evolved is very disturbing. But the fact that they can only evolve to a certain point without people losing all belief is reassuring.
|
On November 14 2015 12:26 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:25 m4ini wrote:On November 14 2015 12:15 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:14 m4ini wrote:That being said, my point is that if you haven't read the Quran, you have no basis to talk about what Islam does or does not teach. This of course applies to me too. A lot of hostility and misunderstanding is born because people have been spouting falsities towards something they actually have never read.
Wrong. Plain wrong. Even if he had read it, it's, like all religious books, all up for interpretation. To the point where both him and the cricket guy are both right and wrong at the same time. That would only ever work if there's no interpretation, or at least almost no interpretation of what you're reading. Read it first then interpret. You have no ground to stand on if you haven't read it in the first place. Or should I go around giving you my opinion of Harry Potter without having ever read it? + Show Spoiler +Don't worry, I actually read it and loved it all except for the final book. One doesn't need to read it, my point is: cricketeer says, the Islam doesn't promote X. He might be right. Random arabic person tells me: it does promote X. He is as right as cricketeer is (sorry, if the name is spelled wrong). Both interpret something that is highly interpretable differently. Who's judging who's right? You can't. If i read it now, i might get to the same conclusion as random arabic person. Who's right then? It's up to interpretion. It's like having one of these ink-spill-pictures in school, one tells you "it's a butterfly", the other one says "a horsehead". It's neither, or both. Kinda hard to get my point across, but i hope you understand what i mean. Yes, you do need to read it. How can you possibly criticize ANYTHING without knowing what it actually is?
The thing is, not even theological scholars who spent their entire freaking lives studying these books can agree on anything......how can a normal person?
They can't even agree on who the successor to Muhammad was and that's what led to this whole Sunni vs. Shiite mess in the first place!
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 14 2015 12:31 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:26 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:25 m4ini wrote:On November 14 2015 12:15 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:14 m4ini wrote:That being said, my point is that if you haven't read the Quran, you have no basis to talk about what Islam does or does not teach. This of course applies to me too. A lot of hostility and misunderstanding is born because people have been spouting falsities towards something they actually have never read.
Wrong. Plain wrong. Even if he had read it, it's, like all religious books, all up for interpretation. To the point where both him and the cricket guy are both right and wrong at the same time. That would only ever work if there's no interpretation, or at least almost no interpretation of what you're reading. Read it first then interpret. You have no ground to stand on if you haven't read it in the first place. Or should I go around giving you my opinion of Harry Potter without having ever read it? + Show Spoiler +Don't worry, I actually read it and loved it all except for the final book. One doesn't need to read it, my point is: cricketeer says, the Islam doesn't promote X. He might be right. Random arabic person tells me: it does promote X. He is as right as cricketeer is (sorry, if the name is spelled wrong). Both interpret something that is highly interpretable differently. Who's judging who's right? You can't. If i read it now, i might get to the same conclusion as random arabic person. Who's right then? It's up to interpretion. It's like having one of these ink-spill-pictures in school, one tells you "it's a butterfly", the other one says "a horsehead". It's neither, or both. Kinda hard to get my point across, but i hope you understand what i mean. Yes, you do need to read it. How can you possibly criticize ANYTHING without knowing what it actually is? .. eh? Okay. Assume i've read it (i actually didn't, only parts of it after i almost got hit by a friend, after i touched the small quran he had hanging around his neck, 20 years ago). I come to the conclusion, that the highly interpretable book indeed is violent, sexist and "religion-racist (no idea what the word for that is). That's the conclusion i have after reading it partially. What now? You, the person who actually didn't read it either completely, yet have a strong opinion, tell me to read the rest? Show nested quote +I totally understand the point you are making the only problem is that the only two results that you can logically expect from this are A)no one can have any opinion on any aspect of any religion "because its open to interpretation" or B)all parties are left with nothing but to agree to disagree, and at the end of the day, in so very many of these debates thats what ends up happening. You continue to believe what you believe about Islam, and I the same.
Thank you. And it's btw not what i believe about Islam specifically. I said "fuck religion", not "fuck islam". The same stuff goes for all religions.
Then you come to the conclusion that it's heavily violent, sexist, etc. etc. and you may continue with your informed opinion.
YAY.
It's like, vegetables make me gag and diarrhea. Should someone who's never eaten vegetables take me as any kind of example of whether or not to eat vegetables?
I dare think not.
|
On November 14 2015 12:33 BisuDagger wrote:Cricketer12, I just want to say I really respect the effort you are going through to post in this thread, share your view, and support your religion. That's all I wanted to say.
:D BD respects me :D
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
People thinking I'm advocating for people to read books and agree on them are wholly misunderstanding me.
I'm saying read first then form an opinion, instead of having an uninformed opinion.
|
Bisutopia19372 Posts
On November 14 2015 12:34 Cricketer12 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:33 BisuDagger wrote:Cricketer12, I just want to say I really respect the effort you are going through to post in this thread, share your view, and support your religion. That's all I wanted to say. :D BD respects me :D
Hey now! Your LR posts are still crap.
+ Show Spoiler +JK 
|
On November 14 2015 12:34 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:31 m4ini wrote:On November 14 2015 12:26 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:25 m4ini wrote:On November 14 2015 12:15 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:14 m4ini wrote:That being said, my point is that if you haven't read the Quran, you have no basis to talk about what Islam does or does not teach. This of course applies to me too. A lot of hostility and misunderstanding is born because people have been spouting falsities towards something they actually have never read.
Wrong. Plain wrong. Even if he had read it, it's, like all religious books, all up for interpretation. To the point where both him and the cricket guy are both right and wrong at the same time. That would only ever work if there's no interpretation, or at least almost no interpretation of what you're reading. Read it first then interpret. You have no ground to stand on if you haven't read it in the first place. Or should I go around giving you my opinion of Harry Potter without having ever read it? + Show Spoiler +Don't worry, I actually read it and loved it all except for the final book. One doesn't need to read it, my point is: cricketeer says, the Islam doesn't promote X. He might be right. Random arabic person tells me: it does promote X. He is as right as cricketeer is (sorry, if the name is spelled wrong). Both interpret something that is highly interpretable differently. Who's judging who's right? You can't. If i read it now, i might get to the same conclusion as random arabic person. Who's right then? It's up to interpretion. It's like having one of these ink-spill-pictures in school, one tells you "it's a butterfly", the other one says "a horsehead". It's neither, or both. Kinda hard to get my point across, but i hope you understand what i mean. Yes, you do need to read it. How can you possibly criticize ANYTHING without knowing what it actually is? .. eh? Okay. Assume i've read it (i actually didn't, only parts of it after i almost got hit by a friend, after i touched the small quran he had hanging around his neck, 20 years ago). I come to the conclusion, that the highly interpretable book indeed is violent, sexist and "religion-racist (no idea what the word for that is). That's the conclusion i have after reading it partially. What now? You, the person who actually didn't read it either completely, yet have a strong opinion, tell me to read the rest? I totally understand the point you are making the only problem is that the only two results that you can logically expect from this are A)no one can have any opinion on any aspect of any religion "because its open to interpretation" or B)all parties are left with nothing but to agree to disagree, and at the end of the day, in so very many of these debates thats what ends up happening. You continue to believe what you believe about Islam, and I the same.
Thank you. And it's btw not what i believe about Islam specifically. I said "fuck religion", not "fuck islam". The same stuff goes for all religions. Then you come to the conclusion that it's heavily violent, sexist, etc. etc. and you may continue with your informed opinion. YAY. It's like, vegetables make me gag and diarrhea. Should someone who's never eaten vegetables take me as any kind of example of whether or not to eat vegetables? I dare think not.
Fuck vegetables too, though. Meat is my vegetable.
I'm saying read first then form an opinion, instead of having an uninformed opinion.
You don't really need to read them entirely though. Otherwise you can't form an opinion on pretty much anything, because i certainly can't cite every single political or juristic paragraph, yet have my opinions on them from whatever i've read.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On November 14 2015 12:34 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:15 Souma wrote:On November 14 2015 12:14 m4ini wrote:That being said, my point is that if you haven't read the Quran, you have no basis to talk about what Islam does or does not teach. This of course applies to me too. A lot of hostility and misunderstanding is born because people have been spouting falsities towards something they actually have never read.
Wrong. Plain wrong. Even if he had read it, it's, like all religious books, all up for interpretation. To the point where both him and the cricket guy are both right and wrong at the same time. That would only ever work if there's no interpretation, or at least almost no interpretation of what you're reading. Read it first then interpret. You have no ground to stand on if you haven't read it in the first place. Or should I go around giving you my opinion of Harry Potter without having ever read it? + Show Spoiler +Don't worry, I actually read it and loved it all except for the final book. Souma, can you understand government if you haven't read every single law they passed? My point is, you can get some sense of an ideology even if you haven't read their scripture. I mean, I'd argue that Muslims are determined more so by their actions than by their holy scripture. And perhaps this should be made clear to you by what happened tonight. If you're willing to put that much weight on the Quran, then how the *fuck* do you explain that the people who did this were leaning on the Quran to justify their actions. Actions speak louder than words. The Quran is words, an ideology. The actions of the people who committed tonight's atrocious acts are real life. And so are the actions of all the Muslims who didn't do any bullshit tonight. So what's that obsession with the scriptures, scriptures don't fucking kill anyone. I don't need the scriptures to gain some understanding of Islam. In fact, the scriptures themselves are a LOT less interesting than the interpretations of them that can be made. The hundreds of different interpretations, Souma... So don't tell people to read the Quran or the Bible, because if they did, the next thing they'd be told is that they fucking read it wrong.
If actions speak louder than words, then inaction speaks just as loud, and the moderates who don't actually commit atrocities should be the shining examples of Islam. End of story.
|
On November 14 2015 12:35 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:34 Cricketer12 wrote:On November 14 2015 12:33 BisuDagger wrote:Cricketer12, I just want to say I really respect the effort you are going through to post in this thread, share your view, and support your religion. That's all I wanted to say. :D BD respects me :D Hey now! Your LR posts are still crap. + Show Spoiler +JK
so long as you are referring to the fact that I can sometimes have posts without very much content in them and not that I post on how awesome people like DRG and sOs are, I can't fault you 
|
To be fair you don't have to read the literature on Mormonism or Scientology to know they're retarded. Sure it's helpful, especially if you want to get into the nitty gritty on why it's so retarded. Likewise you can only watch 10 minutes of a movie and know it's a terrible movie. It is possible to form accurate opinions without covering things from A to Z.
|
On November 14 2015 12:35 Souma wrote:
People thinking I'm advocating for people to read books and agree on them are wholly misunderstanding me.
I'm saying read first then form an opinion, instead of having an uninformed opinion.
All opinions are formed on limited data. I don't need to read the Quran to form an opinion on what it represents based on various other info that's external to the Quran, like the behaviour of different "types" of Muslims. What people do is a whole lot more important than the scripture they read and interpret differently.
And when I say some passages are interpreted differently, I don't mean they slightly disagree on details. There are ENTIRE PASSAGES that are understood like polar opposites.
|
On November 14 2015 12:33 BisuDagger wrote:Cricketer12, I just want to say I really respect the effort you are going through to post in this thread, share your view, and support your religion. That's all I wanted to say.
Seconded. Cricketer12 has been a lot more patient that I could ever be.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
'All opinions are formed on limited data' bull fucking shit.
If you tell me a movie is bad and you only watched the trailer, you lose any semblance of credibility and can go on your way to being an uninformed, ignorant asshat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
