or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Yet More News from Our Friends and Allies...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Yet More News from Our Friends and Allies... - Page 2

post #41 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

This is the key word to your entire post, I think. Whatever it calls itself academically, in reality it's no more a Christian sect than the FSM. OK, perhaps little more. If it really is a Christian sect, why do we have entire countries that all but outlaw Christianity? (and in some cases, actually outlaw it?) Let me guess...it's just those pesky government Fundies again, isn't it? No, you can't just ignore the influence of Isalm itself on these people. You can't pretend that their religion has nothing to do with it.

Who are those countries?

No wait, I'll name them for you: Saudi.

There you have it: Wahabism bans it. Islam does not.

That is to say there are massive Christian communities in Iran, Syria, Jordan, Turkey, Morocco - anywhere in fact where the Islamic brand is not Wahabi.

And it has been this way for 1500 years.

Please comment on this. We need to know your opinion.

Quote:
Let me put it this way: We have Fundies in the US as you've pointed out many times. The US is overwhelmingly Christian. So, why have we not outlawed Islam and beaten those who preach it, as they do to Christians in many Muslim countries? Why have we not burned every mosque to the ground? A lot of it is our system of government, but it's also because Christianity doesn't preach these actions as part of its doctrine. If you think I'm saying that Islam is inherently more violent, you'd be right. That doesn't mean all or most Muslims subscribe to those ideals, of course. But I can't accept that there is no theological difference between the two faiths in this regard.

I do not know of what you speak re America but I do know that Wahabism was a small cult in the Saudi Arabian peninsular that 'got lucky' when oil was discovered.

If it were not for that stroke of coincidence then they would have been an insignificant cult ruling an insignificant backwater.

Quote:
I don't know the Koran that well, but these passages seem pretty clear:

Like I say...you need to know your Qur'an better.

The term 'believer' in the Qur'an applies to Jews and Christians and many other faiths. You are assuming it applies only to Muslims but the Qur'an specifically states it applies to all religions of the Book (back to the 'Christian sect' theory).

Here are the passages:

Quote:
We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and given to Moses, Jesus, and the Prophets, from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another among them (3:84).

And....

Quote:
"Those who believe, and the Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve." Quran 2:62 and 5:69

And again:

Quote:
Among the people of the book are an upright group, who recite the verses of God throughout the watches of the night and make prostrations. They believe in God and the Last Day and command that which is good and forbid that which is bad and compete with one another in good works. Such are among the righteous.

The people of the book means the Jews and Christians.

Also, as is well known, 'Allah' is merely the word for God in Arabic and not a name. Arabic speaking Jews and Christians use it in their services - one should not take it as referring to a specifically Muslim God.


Quote:
Out of context, seg?

No, see above - it's just that you do not know the context.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #42 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I don't know the Koran that well, but these passages seem pretty clear:

Um... how is that any different from the Old Testament?
post #43 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Who are those countries?

No wait, I'll name them for you: Saudi.

There you have it: Wahabism bans it. Islam does not.

That is to say there are massive Christian communities in Iran, Syria, Jordan, Turkey, Morocco - anywhere in fact where the Islamic brand is not Wahabi.

And it has been this way for 1500 years.

Please comment on this. We need to know your opinion.

No, it's not just the Saudis. Christians are persecuted in Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, et al. It's not banned outright in those places, but it's not treated equally or even fairly in many cases. I assume you don't need me to do the research for you here. Christian persecution is not exclusive to Muslim countries, but it is prevalent.

Quote:

I do not know of what you speak re America but I do know that Wahabism was a small cult in the Saudi Arabian peninsular that 'got lucky' when oil was discovered.

If it were not for that stroke of coincidence then they would have been an insignificant cult ruling an insignificant backwater.

You don't know what I speak of? I'm asking: If Christianity and Islam are equally prone to being perverted by Fundies™, why hasn't violent Fundie™ Christianity become more entrenched in the US?

Quote:

Like I say...you need to know your Qur'an better.

The term 'believer' in the Qur'an applies to Jews and Christians and many other faiths. You are assuming it applies only to Muslims but the Qur'an specifically states it applies to all religions of the Book (back to the 'Christian sect' theory).....

In your opinion. Can you provide backing for that claim? I've not heard that even a single time before.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #44 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

No, it's not just the Saudis. Christians are persecuted in Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, et al. It's not banned outright in those places, but it's not treated equally or even fairly in many cases. I assume you don't need me to do the research for you here. Christian persecution is not exclusive to Muslim countries, but it is prevalent.

You did not say 'persecute' - you said 'outlaw it'.

I respond that this is un-Islamic. In all those countries - except Iran which I would question - you will find Wahabis behind it.

In Saudi it is actually the law - passed by Salafi/Wahabi jurists and in the other places it is Wahabi extremists doing it without government sanction.

[quote]You don't know what I speak of? I'm asking: If Christianity and Islam are equally prone to being perverted by Fundies, why hasn't violent Fundie Christianity become more entrenched in the US? [/quote[

Interesting question. I would guess it has to do with socio-ecomomic conditions.

When Islam was at the height of empire and wealthy there was no such extremism and Europe conversely was in the grip of the Inquisition, Witch Hunts and the Dark Ages.

I suppose when people aspire to a wealthier condition and feel oppressed they seek motivation in ideologies (political, religious or otherwise). Now that is the position of the Islamic world. If the US populace had not benefitted from an advanced wealth-creating and relatively free society then the resistance and aspirational movements would have taken on the character of local religion - in that case Christianity.

That's what's happening in Africa with the Lord's Rebel Army now btw. Imo.

Quote:
In your opinion. Can you provide backing for that claim? I've not heard that even a single time before.

Well I just supplied the Qur'anic verses - you can't get clearer than that. What other authority do you want?

It is quite well known - what authority do you want and on which specific issue? Muhammad? A cleric?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #45 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Not so. I couldn't give a flying toss about the rapist's sentences being increased.

My comments are solely about the judgement(s) passed on the woman.

I find your statement "I have not made up my mind if the whole case was treated with justice or not" to be highly disturbing.

You find it disturbing, but I find it's necessary to first get to know all the facts before passing a judgement. When I posted that, I didn't have the time to read up on the case.

Now I had the time and read up on it. Apparantely that is the case:

A shia woman that got just recentely married met with a highschool-friend in order to get a picture of herself back she once gave him.

While sitting in a car, seven men intercepted them, kidnapped and raped them.

According to Saudi-law there were three crimes occuring:

1. The private meeting between the woman and a former male highschool-friend.
2. The kidnapping.
3. The rapings.



The first crime was basically confessed by the woman, the second and third crimes were confessed by the seven men, but later recanted.

The punishment for rapists is usually death, if they are married, and if not, then 100 lashes and a possible banning-time.

Another difference is made when a gun or knife is used to force the victim or when the rapist threatens to kill the victim. In that case it is similar to an act of war. In that case the quran-verse:

Quote:
The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter) (Al-Maidah 5:33)

is applied.

I would say that because of the kidnapping and the amount of men that worked together in this criminal act, it definitely falls under this application.

So a correct islamic punishment for these rapists would be either death, crucification, cutting off one hand and one foot, or throwing them out of the country.

It can of course be argued that "throwing out of the country" can be equaled with prison-time, but then it would have to be lifelong emprisonment, since in the quran-verse there doesn't seem to be a room for return for these "war-mongerers".

So, the saudi-judges were too soft upon the rapists.

But what about the victims? She and her highschool-friend committed a crime, according to saudi-law by meeting with each other in seclusion, and lashes are the punishment for it there.

According to the Quran, espescially given the aisha-story, just meeting with the other sex, although discouraged, is not a crime nor sin in itself, so this seems to be a specific saudi-overreaction-preemption-ruling.

But it is in Saudi-Arabia as it is, and since she has initiated the meeting, she probably receives a higher punishment than her highschool-friend. Unfortunately the international press is concentrating on the fate of the woman, and leaves out the highschool-friend completely, eventhough he was raped, too, so I'm not sure what happens with him.

The question is should the meeting people be punished with lashes, when they were victims of a much worse crime? It can be argued that the rapings were already more than enough punishment for them and therefore should not be punished additionaly by the court.

I agree with that logic, but it seems the saudi judiciary is not thinking in these routes.

Another problem, besides not having mercy, is that saudi judges have complete discretion to form punishment-verdicts, so that one judge can issue a soft punishment while another comes to a harsh verdict, eventhough the cases are similar.

That is intransparent and injust.

Instead a commision should develop standard-punishment-verdicts for crimes, and the judges should be made to follow them and if they want to make softer verdicts or harsher verdicts, they should have to explicitly make the case for it in speech and writing, and of course be open to changes in appeal-courts.


Last but not least, we have the appeal-verdict that doubles the sentencing for the rapists and the victim(s), and prohibits the victim's lawyer to further work in his profession.

The reasoning they gave for the victim's doubled sentencing and the cancelling of the lawyer's license, was that they gave interviews in the media and tried to pressurise the appeal-judges to make verdicts in their favour.

I don't know if that is a crime in Saudi-Arabia or not, but even if it were there is no basis to punish the media-pressure-attempt through lashings.

If it were a crime, then the cancelling of the lawyer's license to profess his job, is justified, since the lawyer would know more than most other people that they are breaking the law.


Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #46 of 125
Thread Starter 
@Nightcrawler: are you something of a Salafist yourself?

I rather think you might be.

Btw: the existence of laws is not the benchmark. There are many laws that should not exist - obeying them is not mandatory just because some idiot passed them.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #47 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

@Nightcrawler: are you something of a Salafist yourself?

I rather think you might be.

Btw: the existence of laws is not the benchmark. There are many laws that should not exist - obeying them is not mandatory just because some idiot passed them.

Well, Saudi-Arabia is claiming to follow God's law, so I have to judge them upon that basis.

Upon that basis, it seems the rapists received a too soft punishment and the punishment for the victim is at least within the original court completely undeserved, since there is no divine law that calls for the punishment of merely opposite-sex-meetings with no fornication happening.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #48 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcrawler View Post

Well, Saudi-Arabia is claiming to follow God's law, so I have to judge them upon that basis.

Upon that basis, it seems the rapists received a too soft punishment and the punishment for the victim is at least within the original court completely undeserved, since there is no divine law that calls for the punishment of merely opposite-sex-meetings with no fornication happening.

Nightcrawler

Well, I'll take that as a yes then.

Fair enough but it seems a bit of a cop-out...there are many countries 'claiming to follow God's law' and many of them are in contradiction so you do not really 'have to judge them upon that basis' - it seems to come back to which ones you agree with. In this case presumably Saudi.

Btw, I put it to you that the meeting between the woman and the old school-friend can not be shown to be a crime or proscribed anywhere in the Qur'an, hadith or Sunna.

But that is perhaps by the by. We are, after all, dealing with a quasi-fascist Dictatorship and as such rationalizations go out of the window.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #49 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

You did not say 'persecute' - you said 'outlaw it'

I respond that this is un-Islamic. In all those countries - except Iran which I would question - you will find Wahabis behind it.

In Saudi it is actually the law - passed by Salafi/Wahabi jurists and in the other places it is Wahabi extremists doing it without government sanction.

At one point I said outlaw. But I didn't say that exclusively.

Quote:
Interesting question. I would guess it has to do with socio-ecomomic conditions.

When Islam was at the height of empire and wealthy there was no such extremism and Europe conversely was in the grip of the Inquisition, Witch Hunts and the Dark Ages.

I suppose when people aspire to a wealthier condition and feel oppressed they seek motivation in ideologies (political, religious or otherwise). Now that is the position of the Islamic world. If the US populace had not benefitted from an advanced wealth-creating and relatively free society then the resistance and aspirational movements would have taken on the character of local religion - in that case Christianity.

That's what's happening in Africa with the Lord's Rebel Army now btw. Imo.

One might be tempted to believe that, but there are two problems:

1. Doesn't that lend weight to the argument that the Islamo-fascists hate us for our affluence, our free markets, etc? Isn't this an argument you reject?

2. If you accept the premise, then why haven't poor Christians engaged in the same extremism worldwide? It's not as if all Christians are affluent. Why don't we have these kind of Fundie™ extremists in Brazil, where 73% of the population is Roman Catholic? Brazil's per capita income is $8,800. Perhaps that is too rich? How about Nicaragua? They have similar percentages of Catholics, but the per capita is only around $3,300. By your theory there should be The New and Improved Crusades happening as we speak.

Quote:

Well I just supplied the Qur'anic verses - you can't get clearer than that. What other authority do you want?

It is quite well known - what authority do you want and on which specific issue? Muhammad? A cleric?

Could you show me specifically? There seems to be a lot of debate from what I can find. It's certainly not cut and dried, not from all of the other references to exactly who the "unbelievers" are. In other references it says that unbelievers are those who don't follow the Holy book, meaning the Koran. In others it says those who don't follow Allah. Of course, Allah is the term for God, but in the same breath, Allah is defined a certain way and communicates His will through the Koran, which only Muslims follow.

It's a little like claiming that according to Christians, Muslims can get into heaven because they accept the virgin birth, even though the Bible clearly dictates that only those who accept Christ as their one and only Savior and Lord can do so.

As I said, not cut and dried.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #50 of 125
double post
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #51 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

At one point I said outlaw. But I didn't say that exclusively.

Hmmm...

Quote:
One might be tempted to believe that, but there are two problems:

1. Doesn't that lend weight to the argument that the Islamo-fascists hate us for our affluence, our free markets, etc? Isn't this an argument you reject?

No. And not just because there is no such thing as an Islamo-fascist.

Fascism - it is well known - is an exclusively right-wing construct and of course, it is wingers who have coined this phrase.

Islamists, oth, are NEVER right-wing - in fact it is a contradiction in terms as the vast majority of right-wing thought (I mean what passes for thought - really, there is no such thing) is antithetical to Islam. As it should be to any thinking person who retains the smallest scintilla of rational analytical capacity and whose processes of mentation are not attentuated to somewhere below the level of a lobotomized Mandrill.

As proof of this I offer my personal guarantee that someone, somewhere, of the winger persuasion will attempt to argue that Hitler was a Socialist because the Nazi party bore the nomenclature of 'National Socialism'.

We laugh hysterically and move on.....

Quote:
2. If you accept the premise, then why haven't poor Christians engaged in the same extremism worldwide? It's not as if all Christians are affluent. Why don't we have these kind of Fundie™ extremists in Brazil, where 73% of the population is Roman Catholic? Brazil's per capita income is $8,800. Perhaps that is too rich? How about Nicaragua? They have similar percentages of Catholics, but the per capita is only around $3,300. By your theory there should be The New and Improved Crusades happening as we speak.

But they have.

The thing that hasn't happened is that a bunch of Xianophobic loons have leapt into the fray shouting "ooh look...ooh ooh......there is a XIan group doing naughty things.....ooh ooh.....bastards....."

Of course were such a group to organize itself they could find much ammunition to launch - the Lord's Rebel Army for example are way ahead of all Islamist groups combined in terms of deaths caused.

And should our friendly neighbourhood phobics ever tire of demonizing Islam and turn to Christian-bashing instead (not likely as most of this breed - like most racists from the KKK onwards - see themselves as Christians anyway) they could perhaps accuse Christianity of conducting an organised campaign led by priests to leave no choirboy unbuggered friom here to the Vatican - in which place they will find sanctuary from the long arm of the law.

Quote:
Could you show me specifically? There seems to be a lot of debate from what I can find. It's certainly not cut and dried, not from all of the other references to exactly who the "unbelievers" are. In other references it says that unbelievers are those who don't follow the Holy book, meaning the Koran. In others it says those who don't follow Allah. Of course, Allah is the term for God, but in the same breath, Allah is defined a certain way and communicates His will through the Koran, which only Muslims follow.

I gave you the Qur'anic quotes....I am not sure how to be more specific. Gabriel is not answering my calls lately but if he does then I will send him round to you with chapter and verse.....

Quote:
It's a little like claiming that according to Christians, Muslims can get into heaven because they accept the virgin birth, even though the Bible clearly dictates that only those who accept Christ as their one and only Savior and Lord can do so.

Except that Christians would not do so as they tend a little to the intolerant.

So who really is the fundie? The group that accepts other religions or the one that denies and condemns them to hell?

You don't have to answer - it is rhetorical and I already know the answer.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #52 of 125
segovius:

From what fundamentalism do I suffer?

You must realize that "fundamentalism" is an actual word with a meaning, not just some vague insult.

Quote:
Dogmatism

In what way would this apply to me? I do not claim to know or have access to any ultimate truth.

Quote:
Antipathy or hatred

What is it that I hate?
How does this supposed hate manifest itself?

Quote:
Ignorance of the issues

Surely you jest if you think this applies to me. I am no genius, but let's be serious…

Quote:
Extrapolation

Does this apply to me? I attack Islam and Christianity, not Muslims and Christians.

Quote:
Dehumanization of the 'enemy'

Then it's a good thing I propose the exact opposite, eh?

Quote:
Holy Texts

This one is just funny. What are my holy texts? Dawkins? Are you serious?
When have I ever expressed any kind of opinion that any books or literature was holy in any sense?

You cannot prove in any real sense the accusations you hold against me, you hold them as a tenent of blind faith, because you realize how weak your true argument is.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #53 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Hmmm...



No. And not just because there is no such thing as an Islamo-fascist.

Fascism - it is well known - is an exclusively right-wing construct and of course, it is wingers who have coined this phrase.

Islamists, oth, are NEVER right-wing - in fact it is a contradiction in terms as the vast majority of right-wing thought (I mean what passes for thought - really, there is no such thing) is antithetical to Islam. As it should be to any thinking person who retains the smallest scintilla of rational analytical capacity and whose processes of mentation are not attentuated to somewhere below the level of a lobotomized Mandrill.

Perhaps you could avoid the question more next time? I disagree that there is no such thing as an Islamo-fascist, but If you prefer another term, fine. I'll repost the question:

Quote:
SDW2001's amended question:

Doesn't that lend weight to the argument that the Islamists hate us for our affluence, our free markets, etc? Isn't this an argument you reject?

An answer would be appreciated.

Quote:
As proof of this I offer my personal guarantee that someone, somewhere, of the winger persuasion will attempt to argue that Hitler was a Socialist because the Nazi party bore the nomenclature of 'National Socialism'.

We laugh hysterically and move on.....

Yes, and let's move on with an answer that addresses the point I was making next time, instead of focusing on semantics, hmmm?

Quote:

But they have.

The thing that hasn't happened is that a bunch of Xianophobic loons have leapt into the fray shouting "ooh look...ooh ooh......there is a XIan group doing naughty things.....ooh ooh.....bastards....."

Of course were such a group to organize itself they could find much ammunition to launch - the Lord's Rebel Army for example are way ahead of all Islamist groups combined in terms of deaths caused.

And should our friendly neighbourhood phobics ever tire of demonizing Islam and turn to Christian-bashing instead (not likely as most of this breed - like most racists from the KKK onwards - see themselves as Christians anyway) they could perhaps accuse Christianity of conducting an organised campaign led by priests to leave no choirboy unbuggered friom here to the Vatican - in which place they will find sanctuary from the long arm of the law.

I see...it's all how "we" have portrayed Islam. Wow, now I've heard it all. The two are not even close to being the same. Where are the large swaths of Christians in depressed countries declaring war on the West for all it's affluence? The difference is in the faith, Seg. Christianity is less prone (at least in its current state of development) to that kind of thing than is Islam.

And I remind you...we're discussing the socioeconomic element here. You said you believed that was one of the prime contributing factors.

Quote:

I gave you the Qur'anic quotes....I am not sure how to be more specific. Gabriel is not answering my calls lately but if he does then I will send him
round to you with chapter and verse.....

Yes, you gave the quotes. But there are others you haven't given, others that contradict your position. It's like saying the Bible forbids homosexuality. It does, then it doesn't. Thou Shalt Not Kill, and then Eye for an Eye. How nice that Islam is so abundantly clear.

Quote:


Except that Christians would not do so as they tend a little to the intolerant.

That is cheap and uncalled for, not to mention untrue.

Quote:

So who really is the fundie? The group that accepts other religions or the one that denies and condemns them to hell?

You don't have to answer - it is rhetorical and I already know the answer.

No, you think you know the answer. Except, the question is bullshit to begin with. You're portraying Muslims in general as accepting of other faiths, when Muslims are responsible for the vast majority of extremist driven terrorism over the past 30 years. You say this despite the previously mentioned persecution of Christians in Muslim nations the world over. Yet, in the Evil, Intolerant United States™, we have a majority Christian population, large numbers of Jews, Muslims and every other faith one can imagine. We have schools that are 90% Christian that sing holiday songs from around the world. We have Diversity efforts in our schools, corporations and government. And it's WE that are intolerant? Wow.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #54 of 125
If this is about socioeconomics, what other groups of poor, besides those of Islamic faith, blow themselves up in the middle of a crowd of innocent people?

(it's not about economics)

And seg, if there is intolerance against Islam in America, is that intolerance Christian-based or secularist-based?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #55 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

If this is about socioeconomics, what other groups of poor, besides those of Islamic faith, blow themselves up in the middle of a crowd of innocent people?

(it's not about economics)

And seg, if there is intolerance against Islam in America, is that intolerance Christian-based or secularist-based?

BINGO. Take a look at what I've posted in the last few posts on this topic.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #56 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

If this is about socioeconomics, what other groups of poor, besides those of Islamic faith, blow themselves up in the middle of a crowd of innocent people?

Do they have to blow themselves up?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #57 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

If this is about socioeconomics, what other groups of poor, besides those of Islamic faith, blow themselves up in the middle of a crowd of innocent people?

As Midwinter says below; 'why are suicide attacks' the benchmark for resistance based on putative economic factors?

But let's assume they are for the sake of argument and look at some statistics.

The Chicago Project on Suicide Terrorism conducted a study of every suicide attack anywhere in the world since 1980. The findings are partially presented in Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism by Dr Robert Pape who headed the project and who is Professor of Political Science and the University of Chicago.

I quote from two online sources which present Q & A sessions with Pape and cite the links:

Quote:
Robert Pape: Over the past two years, I have collected the first complete database of every suicide-terrorist attack around the world from 1980 to early 2004. This research is conducted not only in English but also in native-language sources—Arabic, Hebrew, Russian, and Tamil, and others—so that we can gather information not only from newspapers but also from products from the terrorist community. The terrorists are often quite proud of what they do in their local communities, and they produce albums and all kinds of other information that can be very helpful to understand suicide-terrorist attacks.

This wealth of information creates a new picture about what is motivating suicide terrorism. Islamic fundamentalism is not as closely associated with suicide terrorism as many people think. The world leader in suicide terrorism is a group that you may not be familiar with: the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka.

This is a Marxist group, a completely secular group that draws from the Hindu families of the Tamil regions of the country. They invented the famous suicide vest for their suicide assassination of Rajiv Ghandi in May 1991. The Palestinians got the idea of the suicide vest from the Tamil Tigers.

TAC: So if Islamic fundamentalism is not necessarily a key variable behind these groups, what is?

Robert Pape: The central fact is that overwhelmingly suicide-terrorist attacks are not driven by religion as much as they are by a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland. From Lebanon to Sri Lanka to Chechnya to Kashmir to the West Bank, every major suicide-terrorist campaign—over 95 percent of all the incidents—has had as its central objective to compel a democratic state to withdraw.

American Conservative

The evidence then suggests that it is not religion that is the motivating factor but the desire to oust western democratic states from the region.

I would say this is an economic factor in as much as the bombers are rejecting capitalism - perhaps because they feel they have been excluded from 'wealth' or resent it on account of the fact they are unable to achieve it.

But there's more. From The Pew Forum:

Quote:
PF The conventional wisdom is that suicide terrorism is motivated by religious fanaticism - religious hatred combined with the promise of a martyr's paradise in the hereafter. What does your own research suggest?

Pape The conventional wisdom is mostly wrong. Suicide terrorism is not mainly the product of Islamic fundamentalism or any other evil ideology independent of circumstance.

I have studied 462 suicide terrorists; over half are secular. The world leader in suicide terrorism is the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka - they're a Marxist group, a secular group, a Hindu group. The Tamil Tigers have committed more suicide terrorist attacks than Hamas or Islamic Jihad.

Instead, what more than 95 percent of all suicide terrorist attacks since 1980 have in common is not religion, but a specific secular goal: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory the terrorists view as their homeland. From Lebanon to Chechnya to Kashmir to Sri Lanka to the West Bank, every suicide terrorist campaign since 1980 has had as its main objective to compel a democratic state to withdraw combat forces from territory that the terrorists prize.

PF But it remains true that Islamic terrorist groups like Al Qaeda, Hamas and Hezbollah all together have committed the majority of such attacks, and virtually all the attacks committed against the US and its allies. Does this suggest any special link between Islamic radicalism and suicide terrorism?

Pape No, for two reasons. First, the data show that Islamic fundamentalism is not associated with about half of all suicide attacks. Second, because the data show that suicide terrorism, even among Islamic fundamentalist groups, does not occur very often outside the circumstance of the presence of foreign combat forces on the territory that the terrorists prize. The military presence of foreign combat forces accounts for about 95 percent of all suicide terrorist attacks - even among Muslim groups, even among Islamic fundamentalist groups.


Back to Grover:

Quote:
(it's not about economics)

It's not JUST about economics. It is based partially on economic and political factors. And far more than religious ones.

Quote:
And seg, if there is intolerance against Islam in America, is that intolerance Christian-based or secularist-based?

I have not lived in America since 2001 so I am not familiar with the situation now.

I should guess the intolerance where it exists - and I have no doubt there is far, far less of it than in Europe - is mainly the preserve of a small number of extreme right-wing Christian 'leaders' who then disseminate it amongst the general populace who are not informed enough about Islam to make discerning judgements and assess the evidence. And why should they feel like investigating Islam given the view that these people are putting out?

I also think that there is a 'fear and loathing' of Islam (as a religion, not Muslims per se) amongst sections of the secular populace and this is informed by the media. This would be secular based but I am not sure I'd call it intolerance.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #58 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Yes, you gave the quotes. But there are others you haven't given, others that contradict your position. It's like saying the Bible forbids homosexuality. It does, then it doesn't. Thou Shalt Not Kill, and then Eye for an Eye. How nice that Islam is so abundantly clear.

I not only gave the quote but I explained quite clearly why they do not contradict. You gave those quotes.

Let's go over it again:

1) You provided some quotes to support your claim that Islam was hostile to 'unbelievers' and adduced this term to mean Christians and Jews.

2) I provided quotes to prove that the term 'believers' INCLUDES Muslims, Christians and Jews.

3) Therefore - despite the fact you seem to have been conditioned to see black as white - the group 'unbelievers' must, absolutely must, exclude the group 'believers'.

4) You are therefore wrong. Give back the cigar. Have a nice day.



Oh, one more thing; it is quite clear in Christological theology that the New Testament abrogates the Old Testament - the contradictions you mention occur when compared one against the other.

There's a clue to this when you realize that Judaism is a quite separate religion.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #59 of 125
Frankly speaking, you know the foreign policies of any nation is based on what benefits them. If there is anything more benefitial than the oil supplied by Saudi Arabia or the middle east, maybe the USA would act differently. No one gives a rat's ass about right and wrong in today's world and the attitude and actions of the sole superpower only reiterate and glorify that behavior.

As far the middle east goes, my wish is for the oil supplies to dry up sooner. That will force them to come to terms with reality.
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
Most of us employ the Internet not to seek the best information, but rather to select information that confirms our prejudices. - Nicholas D. Kristof
Reply
post #60 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Well, I'll take that as a yes then.

Fair enough but it seems a bit of a cop-out...there are many countries 'claiming to follow God's law' and many of them are in contradiction so you do not really 'have to judge them upon that basis' - it seems to come back to which ones you agree with. In this case presumably Saudi.

Btw, I put it to you that the meeting between the woman and the old school-friend can not be shown to be a crime or proscribed anywhere in the Qur'an, hadith or Sunna.

But that is perhaps by the by. We are, after all, dealing with a quasi-fascist Dictatorship and as such rationalizations go out of the window.

You can take the Quran and show that a certain law is contradictory to the Quran and therefore prove that a certain country's law is not following God's laws.

As I have already written:
Quote:
According to the Quran, espescially given the aisha-story, just meeting with the other sex, although discouraged, is not a crime nor sin in itself, so this seems to be a specific saudi-overreaction-preemption-ruling.

in this case the punishment of the woman for merely meeting with the opposite sex with no fornication or adultery happening, has no basis in God's laws.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #61 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightcrawler View Post

You can take the Quran and show that a certain law is contradictory to the Quran and therefore prove that a certain country's law is not following God's laws.

As I have already written:


in this case the punishment of the woman for merely meeting with the opposite sex with no fornication or adultery happening, has no basis in God's laws.

Nightcrawler

I have a question then.

In your view, in an Islamic sense, are God's laws subject to change?

That is to say, did the Qur'an over-ride earlier revelations or not?

And if yes then can a subsequent revelation over-ride the Qur'an?

In short: what is immutable - God or God's law?

I put it to you that to claim it is God's law that is immutable (in an Islamic sense) would be to commit the sin of shirq.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #62 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

I have a question then.

In your view, in an Islamic sense, are God's laws subject to change?

That is to say, did the Qur'an over-ride earlier revelations or not?

And if yes then can a subsequent revelation over-ride the Qur'an?

In short: what is immutable - God or God's law?

I put it to you that to claim it is God's law that is immutable (in an Islamic sense) would be to commit the sin of shirq.

The Quran itself claims that there is in the beyond a word of God written on whatever is capable to hold it. This word is something very strange, as it contains the fate of all of us as well as it is recording our deeds, so it is a highly dynamic word, that probably is beyond our capability to understand. In fact all the life in this universe is God's revelation, but time and again, the word is being revealed through humans so as to give direct guidance.

Although it is really the same word in essence, it gets adapted to the specific time and culture it was revealed on and God further makes specific amendments, so as to make identities possible and so as to test us to our faithfulness regarding the message we received.

As to your question of subsequent revelations: Neither the torah nor the gospels close down the path of subsequent revelations, but the Quran does so, by claiming that prophet Muhammad is the seal of the messengers.

As to shirk: In the Quran itself, God warns not to set aside other gods beside Him and condemns it as sinful shirk, leading to hellfire if not repented from before death arrives.

If a believer holds fast on God's law, which the Quran explicitly calls for, does that mean that the believer is committing shirk, as in setting up God's law beside God?

No, since God's law does not take the form of a diety, it is not prayed to, it is merely following what the believer thinks is God's order. There is the story in the Quran, where God calls all the angels to bow down before Adam. Because it was an order of God, it was not shirk to follow it.

The real pressing question is if God's law can be adapted by humans to be compatible with new times and places, without a prophet or messenger or new revelation.


The Quran itself says to follow the best of it and to hold fast to it.

I think sharia-law needs a major reformation but based on the Quran not on western law-systems.

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #63 of 125
segovius:

Quote:
As Midwinter says below; 'why are suicide attacks' the benchmark for resistance based on putative economic factors?

Did I say they were?

I asked an extremely simple question, and I am not surprised that I did not get an answer.

Also, the Tamil Tigers are secular? That is most certainly news to the LTTE, who are predominantly Hindu.

The logic presented by the man you quote is that if there is any hint of socioeconomic motivation, then religion is thrown out of the window and is not a factor. This makes absolutely no sense.

Economics or political oppression alone cannot explain the behavior. Suicide bombing would simply not happen were those involved not given promise of a heaven beyond this life. That is true of the Tamil Tigers and it is true of the Muslim terrorists.

The logic of suicide bombing simply falls apart in a truly secular context. It takes a belief in divinity to be willing to kill yourself in pursuit of any effort.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #64 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

I asked an extremely simple question, and I am not surprised that I did not get an answer.

Well there you go - and that saves me answering why you are a fundie too!

Someone spends a fair bit of time answering you - and instead of rebutting the argument you dismiss it without any consideration.

I am not surprised. There is absolutely NOTHING I could have written that was contrary to your beliefs that would make you engage.

Even SDW, Jubelum and Trumpt can do that with issues they disagree with. You cannot.

That is why I call you a fundie. They have exactly the same characteristic. Dialogue is just not your thing is it?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #65 of 125
Ironic that you say my response is a content-free dismissal when it obviously is not. The Tamils are not secular and it is irrational to dismiss religious motivation when those involved are also poor and oppressed. That is why your argument falls down.

The simple fact of the matter is this: The vast majority of all suicide bombers are religious and Islam is the main religion involved.

As far as my being a "fundie", not one single element of your attempted categorization actually fit me. You have little aside from personal attacks to offer.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #66 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

To be honest I don't know what to say or do - but that's kind of the point; we've got so locked into this one way of acting that we can't seem to think outside of it.


Leaders of all political persuasions have lost integrity. They have no real leadership qualities. Or moral compass.



Do you really think that Muslims in countries like Saudi and Iran WANT to live under threat of such oppression?

Do you think that they believe that this IS what Islam is?

Does any Muslim (other than the fundie extremists) in Syria, Jordan, Turkey, Morocco REALLY want to change to live like that?

No. They want to move to 'Western' ways.

Does this mean they want to renounce Islam? No. They just know that these things are not Islam just like a Christian knows Fred Phelps and the Westboro Church are not Christianity.

Unfortunately, there are many people - at Government level as well as nearer the bottom of the food chain - who have a vested interest in pushing the view that these things are the same.

You know,, you deserve some credit for thinking this through. I agree with you here seg..

When you boil some of this truth down to its roots I think you might agree that what we have too much of in the world are vested interests and their "cheer leaders" trying to influence the populace at large to "agree" with their "vested interests" and oppose those who are the "other" target group.

What we need is to drop our dependance on these "vested interests" and work together for the benefit of all humanity in a spirit of unitiy not division.

cheer leaders need to be put out of work you could say.

We as humanity at large deserve better.

I applaud your well thought out post..

Great work!

Fellows

ohh and one could even say:

The world has never been in unity and has always been at war / battles / fighting / divided etc. and I can't say those who point this out are wrong.

What I would submit for consideration is that in my view God desires for us to be united and the devil / satan wants to divide us, harm us, have us desire to hate and kill others etc.

We all live in "the world" but we could all bring a little heaven on earth if we just lived by the golden rule and served our neighbor and forgave our enemies.

God Bless..
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #67 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

Ironic that you say my response is a content-free dismissal when it obviously is not. The Tamils are not secular and it is irrational to dismiss religious motivation when those involved are also poor and oppressed. That is why your argument falls down.

The simple fact of the matter is this: The vast majority of all suicide bombers are religious and Islam is the main religion involved.

As far as my being a "fundie", not one single element of your attempted categorization actually fit me. You have little aside from personal attacks to offer.

Well, this is not about me. It is about the report of the University of Chicago conducted by one of the world's leading experts in the field.

And you do not seem to have addressed any of his points except the Tamil Tiger one and as usual, you are wrong.

He makes it quite clear - and this is well known - that the Tamil Tigers are a Marxist organization.

I am not sure how far your knowledge of Marxism extends, hopefully further than your grasp of Islam, but I would suggest to you that Marxism is an atheistic ideology.

I don't expect you to accept that, or even consider it, as I imagine that your anti-religious animus is such that you would also hold up the IRA as examples of a Christian Church movement. The facts of the matter are of course that, sociologically speaking, terms like 'Hindu', 'Muslim' and 'Christian' can also apply as geo-political indicators rather than actual expressions of faith.

Were it otherwise one could argue that the IRA - or TT as you do - in fact do represent the religion. Whereas clearly they do not. That is to say: they have no religious objective, they hold no religious dogma nor pay allegiance to any religious authority, they hold no regular sacraments and regularly break those of the religion they ostensibly belong to.

In fact, no-one from the religion generally accepts them at all. I think you will not be able to find one example of any orthodox Catholic leader who accepts the IRA as a religious expression. Nor will you find any IRA member who does so. Not that you'll try even but there you go.

It is the same with the TT and in some cases - Atta blaspheming God, stuffing pork-chops down his throat and coke up his nose in the days before his 'martyrdom' for example - it is the same with Islam.

In fact the only people I can think of who ever level these suggestions are fundies of other persuasions, Islamophobes (and God-o-phobes) and those with other unsavoury agendas.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #68 of 125
segovius:

Quote:
Well, this is not about me. It is about the report of the University of Chicago conducted by one of the world's leading experts in the field.

So you are adding appeal to authority to ad-hominem in your repertoire of logical fallacies?

Quote:
I am not sure how far your knowledge of Marxism extends, hopefully further than your grasp of Islam, but I would suggest to you that Marxism is an atheistic ideology.

How, then, do you explain the reality that the vast majority of the Tamil Tigers are Hindu? It is difficult to be both "atheistic" and Hindu at the same time, I imagine.

Quote:
I don't expect you to accept that, or even consider it, as I imagine that your anti-religious animus is such that you would also hold up the IRA as examples of a Christian Church movement. The facts of the matter are of course that, sociologically speaking, terms like 'Hindu', 'Muslim' and 'Christian' can also apply as geo-political indicators rather than actual expressions of faith.

Sure, but that is not how they are necessarily being used here. How on earth could you possibly know that the Tamils are non-religious? Even further, you added the label "atheistic" to the Tamils, completely without merit.

Quote:
Were it otherwise one could argue that the IRA - or TT as you do - in fact do represent the religion. Whereas clearly they do not. That is to say: they have no religious objective, they hold no religious dogma nor pay allegiance to any religious authority, they hold no regular sacraments and regularly break those of the religion they ostensibly belong to.

Clearly? Clear to whom, to you? No single person or group represents the entirety of any religious faith and no one, as far as I know, has ever claimed such a thing.

However, if one cannot interpret the nature of a religion by the behavior of its adherents then how does one interpret the nature of the religion?

Quote:
In fact, no-one from the religion generally accepts them at all. I think you will not be able to find one example of any orthodox Catholic leader who accepts the IRA as a religious expression. Nor will you find any IRA member who does so. Not that you'll try even but there you go.

Why would "any orthodox Catholic leader" be any more valid a spokesman for the faith than the IRA killer? The Pope is no more a valid authority on the nature of Christianity than a fundamentalist militiaman cooped up in Montana.

What you seem to argue here is that any religion is whatever the majority of its adherents say it is, which is pure madness in its own terms.

Quote:
In fact the only people I can think of who ever level these suggestions are fundies of other persuasions, Islamophobes (and God-o-phobes) and those with other unsavoury agendas.

Again, asinine ad-hominem completely free of content rears its ugly head.

Tell me, what might my "unsavoury agenda" be? A terrible outbreak of skepticism regarding absurd religious propositions? RUN FOR THE HILLS, DECENT SOCIETY!
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #69 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

How, then, do you explain the reality that the vast majority of the Tamil Tigers are Hindu? It is difficult to be both "atheistic" and Hindu at the same time, I imagine.

Atheism in Hinduism

But still, I'm not sure if he's referring to "Marxism" as distinct from "Socialism" because I know Catholic Liberation Theology (before Ratzinger's iron fist eradicated it) is highly socialist.
post #70 of 125
From your link...

The atheistic viewpoint as present in the Samkhya and Mimamsa schools of Hindu philosophy takes the form of rejecting a creator-God. The Samkhya school believed in a dual existence of Prakriti ("nature") and Purusha ("spirit") and had no place for an Ishvara ("God") in its system. The early Mimamsakas believed in a adrishta ("unseen") that was the result of performing karmas ("works") and saw no need for an Ishvara in their system. Mimamsa, as a philosophy, deals exclusively with karma and thus is sometimes called Karma-Mimamsa. The karmas dealt with in Mimamsa concern the performance of Yajnas ("sacrifices to gods") enjoined in the Vedas.

Suddenly atheism means lack of belief in a creator-god?

So beyond the spurious label of "Hindu atheism", are the Tamils actually involved in this ideology?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #71 of 125
Beats me.



M.I.A.'s Kala rocks though.
post #72 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

I not only gave the quote but I explained quite clearly why they do not contradict. You gave those quotes.

Let's go over it again:

1) You provided some quotes to support your claim that Islam was hostile to 'unbelievers' and adduced this term to mean Christians and Jews.

2) I provided quotes to prove that the term 'believers' INCLUDES Muslims, Christians and Jews.

3) Therefore - despite the fact you seem to have been conditioned to see black as white - the group 'unbelievers' must, absolutely must, exclude the group 'believers'.

4) You are therefore wrong. Give back the cigar. Have a nice day.



Oh, one more thing; it is quite clear in Christological theology that the New Testament abrogates the Old Testament - the contradictions you mention occur when compared one against the other.

There's a clue to this when you realize that Judaism is a quite separate religion.

You explained what was POSTED. You did not demonstrate conclusively that your interpretation was the correct one. You can't possibly expect me to accept that all interpretations to the contrary are just based on propaganda.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #73 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

Atheism in Hinduism

But still, I'm not sure if he's referring to "Marxism" as distinct from "Socialism" because I know Catholic Liberation Theology (before Ratzinger's iron fist eradicated it) is highly socialist.

I've been looking at the Eastern religion thing -- I've come to the conclusion, that unity is the goal -- those religions tend to take the shape of whatever political container they are poured into.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #74 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You explained what was POSTED. You did not demonstrate conclusively that your interpretation was the correct one. You can't possibly expect me to accept that all interpretations to the contrary are just based on propaganda.

Ok, you've convinced me logic and reason won't do it...what do you want? An official fatwa?

Which schools of jurisprudence do you accept and which ones do you not approve of?
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #75 of 125
segovius, I'm surprised you can still type -- what with holding your breath until Saturday's big doings, and all.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #76 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dmz View Post

segovius, I'm surprised you can still type -- what with holding your breath until Saturday's big doings, and all.

uh?

.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #77 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

uh?

.

Quote:
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – President Gen. Pervez Musharraf could quit as chief of Pakistan's army and take an oath as a civilian president by Saturday, a senior official said.

I'll believe it when I see it.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #78 of 125
Quote:
Ok, you've convinced me logic and reason won't do it...what do you want? An official fatwa?

I cannot speak for SDW, but reasoned argument is what generally convinces people of ideas, not appeals to authority.

You speak of Christology as if it is a unified voice. tut tut
One thread can only contain so much intellectual dishonesty, you are bringing this one to bursting point.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #79 of 125
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

I cannot speak for SDW, but reasoned argument is what generally convinces people of ideas, not appeals to authority.

You speak of Christology as if it is a unified voice. tut tut
One thread can only contain so much intellectual dishonesty, you are bringing this one to bursting point.

Are you familiar with the work of Romanian playwright Eugène Ionesco?

You'd really like him.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #80 of 125
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

I cannot speak for SDW, but reasoned argument is what generally convinces people of ideas, not appeals to authority.

You speak of Christology as if it is a unified voice. tut tut
One thread can only contain so much intellectual dishonesty, you are bringing this one to bursting point.

I would like to see some truly credible sources on Seg's claim. He seems to think that a few verses should be enough for me, just because he said so. The claim is that 'believers" includes all Christians and Jews. What he posted supported that, but something tells me that's not the whole story. How about some expert opinions? That's all I'm asking for. So far what I've gotten is a few verses and the notion that any other interpretation is just anti-Islamic propaganda. I'm not buyin' it.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Yet More News from Our Friends and Allies...