Muslims and their shit disgust me. Tough luck for the (as it seems) minority that isn't fucked up and stays true to the original Islam which is actually the most tolerant religion out there.
80 Lashes for 'Immoral' Iranian - Page 4
Forum Index > General Forum |
![]()
Nyovne
Netherlands19135 Posts
Muslims and their shit disgust me. Tough luck for the (as it seems) minority that isn't fucked up and stays true to the original Islam which is actually the most tolerant religion out there. | ||
oshibori_probe
United States2933 Posts
| ||
bumpirate
United States122 Posts
| ||
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
On August 24 2007 07:30 Kwark wrote: This is perhaps my biggest problem with modern liberals. While I consider myself a liberal democrat (ie committed to both liberal values and democracy) I find the apologism within modern liberalism absolutely astounding. The idea that all cultures are equal and should be respected equally is politically correct bullshit. This is a culture which hangs children for being gay. Tolerance is not the solution. The argument that it's 'just their culture' is both demeaning to their intelligence and to humanity as a whole. This is not a case in which each culture can learn something from the other and should be treated as equals. This is a cruel, repressive and downright vicious culture which we have evolved beyond in the western world. It is a blight on the conscience of our species and the sooner it is eradicated the better. It is nothing more than denial of human rights. Now take the Amish, they don't hurt anybody, it is simply a variation of lifestyle. And more importantly, they get the choice. That is a variation in culture I will respect. This, this is just barbarism. The existence of a culture which degenerates the human spirit this way is an insult to everything that humanity strives to become. I agree completly. However I dont think muslims are any worse than christians. Christians have done the same or worse things before. The fact that western society has broken free from this kind of theocracy cant be credited to christianity being more humane than islam. Also its not like the US has been moving in the right direction last couple of decades. Since Reagan you have to be a devout christian to even be qualified to candidate for presidentcy. The evangelical loby is stronger than ever. They have started a creationism museum and are trying to get creationism taught in schools around the country. I think that if there isnt a reaction soon then western society or atleast the US wil fall back into theocracy again. As you might know the arabs were advanced far beyond europe durign the middle ages. Words like algebra and algorithm are arabic. They had a culture of reason, critical thinking and science back then. What you might not know is that what stopped that period and made them fall down the abyss of theocracy was something a lot like what is happening in the US today. People started doubting science and there were arabic philosofers who stated that the numbers and mathematics were the devils invention. Thats the kind of stuff that happend when you lose faith in reason and critical thinking. I hope I dont make this into a religion thread ![]() | ||
iosef
Israel194 Posts
don't blame 'Islam' for this shit. don't blame 'their values' or 'their society.' religious nuts would institute exactly the same rules in the USA if they were given free sway over the government, and you know it. what's scary is that the people who would turn the US into an Iran-style theocracy have tremendous political strength (read: the Christian Right). | ||
DrainX
Sweden3187 Posts
On August 24 2007 10:15 iosef wrote: this is what happens when there is no separation of church and state. this is what happens when the state has the power to limit people's individual freedoms and civil rights. don't blame 'Islam' for this shit. don't blame 'their values' or 'their society.' religious nuts would institute exactly the same rules in the USA if they were given free sway over the government, and you know it. what's scary is that the people who would turn the US into an Iran-style theocracy have tremendous political strength (read: the Christian Right). I agree completly. I cant believe im hearing those words from someone from Israel ._. Its not what im used to hearing Israelis say about muslims. | ||
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
On August 24 2007 10:15 iosef wrote: this is what happens when there is no separation of church and state. this is what happens when the state has the power to limit people's individual freedoms and civil rights. don't blame 'Islam' for this shit. don't blame 'their values' or 'their society.' religious nuts would institute exactly the same rules in the USA if they were given free sway over the government, and you know it. what's scary is that the people who would turn the US into an Iran-style theocracy have tremendous political strength (read: the Christian Right). orly | ||
![]()
KwarK
United States43061 Posts
Yes. There are no shortage of campaigns for america to be governed by biblical law. Fortunately there are sufficient moderates for that to be turned down. | ||
str
Bulgaria192 Posts
On August 24 2007 09:44 Kwark wrote: Actually the evidence very much suggests that if you don't repress western values they are accepted eagerly by the people. Take the example of Turkey, or Japan for that matter. Or any of the ex-Soviet countries. The reason for this is that western values are generally good for the people involved. ie women like not being treated as second class citizens. gay people like not being hung. If the state lets the people choose I have confidence that they will make the humane choice. my sentiments exactly. although the "if" in ur last sentence is preeety big. it should be clear that the people with power are not going to willingly let go of it therefore they wont just let the people choose what they want to do. furthermore for the people that have spent their whole lives inside such countries/communities there would be no reason to change anything since they have never experienced the "western values" and for all they know we are all sinners and shall burn in hell. thats where the younger generation come into play. they come to the western world and soak up the ideas of democracy and liberalism and in some maybe not so distant future they will rise against the system. u could actually see this in my home country Bulgaria. many of the 60+ year olds still believe that 45 years of communism was the best that ever happened to us(which of course couldnt be further from the truth) and it was the young generation at that time that rebelled and overthrew the system. it really wasnt that hard for us bulgarians to do so since at that time (~1989) most of the communist regimes in our region had already collapsed. thats why i think it will be much harder for the islamic countries to follow suite. but as i said its all a matter of internal struggle and one can only hope for their sake theyll come about sooner than later | ||
fight_or_flight
United States3988 Posts
On August 24 2007 10:30 Kwark wrote: Yes. There are no shortage of campaigns for america to be governed by biblical law. Fortunately there are sufficient moderates for that to be turned down. Well, it is true that the lives of mohammed and jesus were almost identical. + Show Spoiler + obligatory notice of sarcasm in preceding sentence | ||
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
On August 24 2007 10:30 Kwark wrote: Yes. There are no shortage of campaigns for america to be governed by biblical law. Fortunately there are sufficient moderates for that to be turned down. Examples? Since there's "no shortage", give 3 mainstream examples. Also, remember that the original poster claimed that religious nuts in the US would implement "exactly the same" rules, so list something reasonably comparable. | ||
DV8
United States1623 Posts
On August 24 2007 08:17 fight_or_flight wrote: Like I said in the first 5 words of my post, I agree with you. I just don't understand how you can impose some beliefs on others but not other beliefs. because someone needs to say it. Just cause a 95 ford taurus and the mclauren F1 are both cars does not mean they are equal some shit is just plain better than others. No matter how bad western society is we are still a step up from theirs. | ||
Phyre
United States1288 Posts
However, I don't believe we can just respect the actions of other cultures as long as they simply don't threaten us directly. There are some actions that I believe most humans would consider wrong and action should be taken against the offending group. The holocaust anyone? Any of you people preaching tolerance want to tell me their stance on "tolerating" the Nazis and their actions? | ||
iosef
Israel194 Posts
On August 24 2007 10:39 HeadBangaa wrote: Examples? Since there's "no shortage", give 3 mainstream examples. Also, remember that the original poster claimed that religious nuts in the US would implement "exactly the same" rules, so list something reasonably comparable. by definition people advocating for things like the death penalty for gays, prohibition etc are not 'mainstream' in the U.S. but that doesn't mean they don't exist or have considerable influence. look at Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell for example. google search 'death penalty for gays.' the first two results are a colorado radio show host and someone who ran for the senate. here is the website of someone currently running for the U.S. senate. it advocates, among other things, execution for gays and flogging for adulterers. | ||
![]()
KwarK
United States43061 Posts
On August 24 2007 10:59 Phyre wrote: Does anyone know the laws regarding leaving Iran? With regards to all this talk of "tolerating other cultures", it seems like it could work if all citizens were able to leave and apply for entrance into another country of their choosing. Don't like the rules in the USA? You can leave. Don't like the rules in Iran? Somehow I doubt you can freely leave. Outside the EU no country operates that policy and even within the EU it is only for citizens of other member states. As a citizen of America you could probably get a permit to live and work pretty much anywhere you wanted. As a citizen of Iran you'd stand pretty much 0 chance of being allowed to live and work within America, or to be honest, within most of the Western world. It's pretty shameful. | ||
![]()
KwarK
United States43061 Posts
On August 24 2007 10:39 HeadBangaa wrote: Examples? Since there's "no shortage", give 3 mainstream examples. Also, remember that the original poster claimed that religious nuts in the US would implement "exactly the same" rules, so list something reasonably comparable. You ask for mainstream examples of extremism. You must see why that's difficult to provide. I never claimed they were mainstream, I said that they exist and that there are a lot of them. A few seconds on google revealed the following. I cannot vouch for the accuracy or source as I did not care enough to look into either. Sorry. + Show Spoiler + DOMINIONISTS AND RECONSTRUCTIONISTS The Reconstructionist movement, founded in 1973 by Rousas Rushdooney, is the intellectual foundation for the most politically active element within the Christian Right. Rushdooney's 1,600 page three-volume work, Institutes of Biblical Law, argued that American society should be governed according to the Biblical precepts in the Ten Commandments. He wrote that the elect, like Adam and Noah, were given dominion over the earth by God and must subdue the earth, along with all non-believers, so the Messiah could return. This was a radically new interpretation for many in the evangelical movement. The Messiah, it was traditionally taught, would return in an event called "the Rapture" where there would be wars and chaos. The non-believers would be tormented and killed and the elect would be lifted to heaven. The Rapture was not something that could be manipulated or influenced, although believers often interpreted catastrophes and wars as portents of the imminent Second Coming. Rushdooney promoted an ideology that advocated violence to create the Christian state. His ideology was the mirror image of Liberation Theology, which came into vogue at about the same time. While the Liberation Theologians crammed the Bible into the box of Marxism, Rushdooney crammed it into the equally distorting box of classical fascism. This clash was first played out in Latin America when I was there as a reporter two decades ago. In El Salvador leftist priests endorsed and even traveled with the rebel movements in Nicaragua and El Salvador, while Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, along with conservative Latin American clerics, backed the Contras fighting against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and the murderous military regimes in El Salvador, Guatemala, Chile and Argentina. The Institutes of Biblical Law called for a Christian society that was harsh, unforgiving and violent. Offenses such as adultery, witchcraft, blasphemy and homosexuality, merited the death penalty. The world was to be subdued and ruled by a Christian United States. Rushdooney dismissed the number of 6 million Jews killed in the Holocaust as an inflated figure and his theories on race echoed Nazi Eugenics. "The white man has behind him centuries of Christian culture and the discipline and selective breeding this faith requires...," he wrote. "The Negro is a product of a radically different past, and his heredity has been governed by radically different considerations." "The background of Negro culture is African and magic, and the purposes of the magic are control and power over God, man, nature, and society. Voodoo, or magic, was the religion and life of American Negroes. Voodoo songs underlie jazz, and old voodoo, with its power goal, has been merely replaced with revolutionary voodoo, a modernized power drive." (see The Religious Right , a publication of the ADL, pg. 124.) Rushdooney was deeply antagonistic to the federal government. He believed the federal government should concern itself with little more than national defense. Education and social welfare should be handed over to the churches. Biblical law must replace the secular legal code. This ideology remains at the heart of the movement. It is being enacted through school vouchers, with federal dollars now going into Christian schools, and the assault against the federal agencies that deal with poverty and human services. The Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives is currently channeling millions in federal funds to groups such Pat Robertson's Operation Blessing , and National Right to Life, as well as to fundamentalist religious charity organizations and programs promoting sexual abstinence. Rushdooney laid the groundwork for a new way of thinking about political involvement. The Christian state would come about not only through signs and wonders, as those who believed in the rapture believed? , but also through theestablishment of the Christian nation. But he remained, even within the Christian Right, a deeply controversial figure. Dr. Tony Evans, the minister of a Dallas church and the founder of Promise Keepers, articulated Rushdooney's extremism in a more palatable form. He called on believers, often during emotional gatherings at football stadiums, to commit to Christ and exercise power within the society as agents of Christ. He also called for a Christian state. But he did not advocate the return of slavery, as Rushdooney did, nor list a string of offenses such as adultery punishable by death, nor did he espouse the Nazi-like race theories. It was through Evans, who was a spiritual mentor to George Bush that Dominionism came to dominate the politically active wing of the Christian Right.The religious utterances from political leaders such as George Bush, Tom Delay, Pat Robertson and Zell Miller are only understandable in light of Rushdooney and Dominionism. These leaders believe that God has selected them to battle the forces of evil, embodied in "secular humanism," to create a Christian nation. Pat Robertson frequently tells believers "our aim is to gain dominion over society." Delay has told supporters, such as at a gathering two years ago at the First Baptist Church in Pearland , Texas , "He [God] is using me, all the time, everywhere, to stand up for biblical worldview in everything I do and everywhere I am. He is training me, He is working with me." Delay went on to tell followers "If we stay inside the church, the culture won't change." Pat Robertson, who changed the name of his university to Regent University , says he is training his students to rule when the Christian regents take power, part of the reign leading to the return of Christ. Robertson resigned as the head of the Christian Coalition when Bush took office, a sign many took to signal the ascendancy of the first regent. This battle is not rhetorical but one that followers are told will ultimately involve violence. And the enemy is clearly defined and marked for destruction. "Secular Humanists," the popular Christian Right theologian Francis Schaeffer wrote in one of numerous diatribes, "are the greatest threat to Christianity the world has ever known." One of the most enlightening books that exposes the ultimate goals of movement is America's Providential History , the standard textbook used in many Christian schools and a staple of the Christian home schooling movement. It sites Genesis 26, which calls for mankind to " .have dominnion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, over the cattle and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth" as evidence that the Bible callls for "Bible believing Christians" to take dominion of America. "When God brings Noah through the flood to a new earth, He reestablished the Dominion Mandate but now delegates to man the responsibility for governing other men." (page 19). The authors write that God has called the United States to become "the first truly Christian nation" (page 184) and "make disciples of all nations." The book denounces income tax as "idolatry," property tax as "theft" and calls for an abolish of inheritance taxes in the chapter entitled Christian Economics. The loss of such tax revenues will bring about the withering away of the federal government and the empowerment of the authoritarian church, although this is not explict in the text. Rushdooney's son-in-law, Gary North, a popular writer and founder of the Institute for Christian Economics, laid out the aims of the Christian Right. "So let's be blunt about it: We must use the doctrine of religious liberty to gain independence for Christian schools until we train up a generation of people who know that there is no religious neutrality, no neutral law, no neutral education, and no neutral civil government. Then they will get busy in constructing a Bible-based social, political and religious order which finally denies the religious liberty of the enemies of God." (Christianity and Civilization, Spring, 1982) Dominionists have to operate, for now, in the contaminated environment of the secular, liberal state. They have learned, therefore, to speak in code. The code they use is the key to understanding the dichotomy of the movement, one that has a public and a private face. In this they are no different from the vanguard, as described by Lenin, or the Islamic terrorists who shave off their beards, adopt western dress and watch pay-for-view pornographic movies in their hotel rooms the night before hijacking a plane for a suicide attack. Joan Bokaer, the Director of Theocracy Watch, a project of the Center for Religion, Ethics and Social Policy at Cornell University , who runs the encyclopedic web site theocracywatch.org, was on a speaking tour a few years ago in Iowa . She obtained a copy of a memo Pat Robertson handed out to followers at the Iowa Republican County Caucus. It was titled, "How to Participate in a Political Party" and read: "Rule the world for God." "Give the impression that you are there to work for the party, not push an ideology. "Hide your strength. "Don't flaunt your Christianity. "Christians need to take leadership positions. Party officers control political parties and so it is very important that mature Christians have a majority of leadership whenever possible, God willing." | ||
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
On August 24 2007 11:00 iosef wrote: by definition people advocating for things like the death penalty for gays, prohibition etc are not 'mainstream' in the U.S. but that doesn't mean they don't exist or have considerable influence. look at Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell for example. google search 'death penalty for gays.' the first two results are a colorado radio show host and someone who ran for the senate. here is the website of someone currently running for the U.S. senate. it advocates, among other things, execution for gays and flogging for adulterers. That's not mainstream. You compare the major front-running idealogy of Iran to that of the most-fringed spectrum of American reactionaries. You fail. | ||
Sadist
United States7285 Posts
that slavery was the culture in the southern US 150 years ago, would you feel the same about that? | ||
Fab Abs
5 Posts
Hopefully when you grow up you will understand the world around you better. There is no such thing as right and wrong. What you are told is 'natural' is in fact unnatural. Nothing we do is natural. Sure, we share many biological/physical attributes except for skin color. Hell, one of my profs even said it: 'We're all shades of black.' You are raised and shaped to believe certain myths that are the foundation of your nations, i.e. Americans - individualistic, equality and freedom ways whereas Muslims live based on a Patriarchal, male dominated society where religious ideals are favored heavily to maintain order in a chaotic world. They do it to preserve their system and anyone intolerant should know they will receive the same punishment if they don't obey. You should pick up an American History Textbook sometime. It is the most sugarcoated, Patriotic load of crap I have ever read in my entire life. Read anything based on the Frontier - from the East to the West. For more examples look at the State School System, or Slavery. You cannot argue against science. Every society does this though. They want you to catter to the basis of what their society is. Why do you everyone thinks Canadians are so friendly? It's because Canada was built on a collective system not to mention the winter weather used to be so bad the first settlers had to work together just to survive. | ||
HeadBangaa
United States6512 Posts
On August 24 2007 11:04 Kwark wrote: You ask for mainstream examples of extremism. You must see why that's difficult to provide. Hmm, I knew you misunderstood, which is why I directed you to iosef's post, which was what I responded to. He stated that contemporary religious people in the United States would implement the same laws. I questioned that. You said there's no shortage of such political bids. I said "show me a few". You said, "i can't, that's hard". lol Rather than admit your hyperbole, you give me that garbage post. Pffft | ||
| ||