• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Sudan Massacre

 
 
 
Emily Lake said:
Toni said:
Emily Lake said:
You are all off your rockers. You're letting your own hatred of christianity blind you to an objective application of skeptical atheism.
Click to expand...
Who hates Christianity? Not me!

Are you letting your hatred of Islam blind you?

Right now, there is a rise in fundamentalism in Christianity and in Islam that is frankly against the core teachings of both religions, which is only serving to spur hatred and conflict—and enormous profits. Look at the money trail!

Or look at the former Soviet Union and post Revolutionary China and their suppression of all religion. Did it make them less authoritarian? More tolerant?
Click to expand...
You're the one who has opined that christianity is at least as big a risk as islam is. Whether you consider it against the core teachings of the religions or not, I think it's willfully blind to look at the state of islam-dominated countries versus christian-dominated countries and come to the conclusion that they're equally dangerous.
Click to expand...
Fundamentalism is the danger—not Christianity or Islam or Buddhism. I know you don’t believe me but look at Project 2025: it’s pseudo fundamentalism rapist Christianity and IMO, that’s the big threat to the US. It’s against everything the country stands for or used to stand for.
 
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
Emily Lake said:
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
Emily Lake said:
You are all off your rockers. You're letting your own hatred of christianity blind you to an objective application of skeptical atheism.
Click to expand...

You are making up personal attacks to substitute an argument. Many of us, myself included, do not hate Christianity. I've said over and over again that religion is neutral, like a hammer. A thing that is so extensive and contradictory like the bible can be used to support any kind of belief. This means that believers are prone to external influences, whether it is the people leading them or the times that they live in with those external variables. A previous post you bashed but did not understand was discussing history exactly because it shows how such religions can interact with different external variables. There simply isn't anything inherent in Christianity to not have the majority of its adherents regress when those variables show up again.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that any system of belief can be abused.

Now... which of those religions is currently being abused in such a way right now?
Click to expand...

Both, but why are you focusing on "currently?" If it is some kind of threat assessment, I would counter that numbers in proximity also feeds into risk.
Click to expand...
Because current is what's happening right now. What happened a few hundred years ago doesn't present any risk to people alive today. I didn't think this was a difficult concept, really.

Oh no Bob, there's a ravenous polar bear climbing over our back fence right now!
Calm down Sally, it's nothing to be concerned about. Two hundred years ago there were mountain lions eating people just a mile away!
 
Toni said:
Emily Lake said:
Toni said:
Emily Lake said:
You are all off your rockers. You're letting your own hatred of christianity blind you to an objective application of skeptical atheism.
Click to expand...
Who hates Christianity? Not me!

Are you letting your hatred of Islam blind you?

Right now, there is a rise in fundamentalism in Christianity and in Islam that is frankly against the core teachings of both religions, which is only serving to spur hatred and conflict—and enormous profits. Look at the money trail!

Or look at the former Soviet Union and post Revolutionary China and their suppression of all religion. Did it make them less authoritarian? More tolerant?
Click to expand...
You're the one who has opined that christianity is at least as big a risk as islam is. Whether you consider it against the core teachings of the religions or not, I think it's willfully blind to look at the state of islam-dominated countries versus christian-dominated countries and come to the conclusion that they're equally dangerous.
Click to expand...
Fundamentalism is the danger—not Christianity or Islam or Buddhism. I know you don’t believe me but look at Project 2025: it’s pseudo fundamentalism rapist Christianity and IMO, that’s the big threat to the US. It’s against everything the country stands for or used to stand for.
Click to expand...
You're not wrong about fundamentalism being the danger. That said, across the globe, fundamentalist muslims far outnumber fundamentalist christians, and they're the ones actively expanding their adherent population and taking over countries.

Why do you think we shouldn't be concerned about a large and expanding global population of fundamentalists that have growing populations in western countries?
 
Look, are you guys afraid that if you acknowledge that islam as a religion is incompatible with western liberal values, that you'll be called an islamaphobe and you'll lose friends for being a bigot?
 
Emily Lake said:
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
Emily Lake said:
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
Emily Lake said:
You are all off your rockers. You're letting your own hatred of christianity blind you to an objective application of skeptical atheism.
Click to expand...

You are making up personal attacks to substitute an argument. Many of us, myself included, do not hate Christianity. I've said over and over again that religion is neutral, like a hammer. A thing that is so extensive and contradictory like the bible can be used to support any kind of belief. This means that believers are prone to external influences, whether it is the people leading them or the times that they live in with those external variables. A previous post you bashed but did not understand was discussing history exactly because it shows how such religions can interact with different external variables. There simply isn't anything inherent in Christianity to not have the majority of its adherents regress when those variables show up again.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that any system of belief can be abused.

Now... which of those religions is currently being abused in such a way right now?
Click to expand...

Both, but why are you focusing on "currently?" If it is some kind of threat assessment, I would counter that numbers in proximity also feeds into risk.
Click to expand...
Because current is what's happening right now. What happened a few hundred years ago doesn't present any risk to people alive today. I didn't think this was a difficult concept, really.

Oh no Bob, there's a ravenous polar bear climbing over our back fence right now!
Calm down Sally, it's nothing to be concerned about. Two hundred years ago there were mountain lions eating people just a mile away!
Click to expand...

You did not address what I wrote. I live in New England. I don't have to worry about polar bears. Black bears are more common where I live even if polar bears are stronger. Ergo, the risk of a polar bear < the risk of a black bear for me.

Also, if half my neighbors scream Make Black Bears Great Again every night and want to send in more black bears to our region, the risk is also increased.
 
Emily Lake said:
Look, are you guys afraid that if you acknowledge that islam as a religion is incompatible with western liberal values, that you'll be called an islamaphobe and you'll lose friends for being a bigot?
Click to expand...
Christianity as a religion is also incompatible with certain modern Western values (not necessarily liberal values but dominant values, particularly economic) with its messages of helping the poor, and being non-violent and non-racist. Of course that is the pure form of the religion, not the actual practical application (US slavery, crusades, MAGA, etc). Indonesia has over 200 million people, mainly Moslems, yet it isn't doing all the things that rich middle eastern nations are doing.
 
Emily Lake said:
I don't think christian people are better than muslim people as people. I do, however, think that chrisianity as currently practiced is less dangerous than islam as currently practiced as a religion.
Click to expand...
You’re still saying Islamists are not the problem, Islam is. AGAIN. I get that you hate Islam and love Jesus but I’m saying that’s bullshit.
Religion is religion and it compels people to behave badly. Christianity in its myriad forms is no different in that regard from Voodoo, Hinduism or Uigurism.
It has ever been so, and historically, religions flow seamlessly from humanitarian outfits to for-profit torture centers and back to humanitarian outfits again.
Historically speaking, de Torquemada was last week and he was not the last of his kind.
 
Freedom isn't consistent with the Old Testament and probably is slightly more consistent with the New Testament, meaning an individual or a denomination can make a choice of interpretation among contradictions. They can reject the old and focus on specific NT verses that might be more compatible and they can choose to ignore some other NT verses as outdated. This is what happens when you have a contradictory system. In any case, the love of democracy and freedom are external variables as well as the ideology of separation of church and state. It isn't merely that those external variables change over time, it's also that they are not 100% present now in the US and there is a large movement within Christianity to greatly reduce them. Those persons are here in the present, they are numerous, and they are in charge of our federal government.
 
Emily Lake said:
Toni said:
Emily Lake said:
Toni said:
Emily Lake said:
You are all off your rockers. You're letting your own hatred of christianity blind you to an objective application of skeptical atheism.
Click to expand...
Who hates Christianity? Not me!

Are you letting your hatred of Islam blind you?

Right now, there is a rise in fundamentalism in Christianity and in Islam that is frankly against the core teachings of both religions, which is only serving to spur hatred and conflict—and enormous profits. Look at the money trail!

Or look at the former Soviet Union and post Revolutionary China and their suppression of all religion. Did it make them less authoritarian? More tolerant?
Click to expand...
You're the one who has opined that christianity is at least as big a risk as islam is. Whether you consider it against the core teachings of the religions or not, I think it's willfully blind to look at the state of islam-dominated countries versus christian-dominated countries and come to the conclusion that they're equally dangerous.
Click to expand...
Fundamentalism is the danger—not Christianity or Islam or Buddhism. I know you don’t believe me but look at Project 2025: it’s pseudo fundamentalism rapist Christianity and IMO, that’s the big threat to the US. It’s against everything the country stands for or used to stand for.
Click to expand...
You're not wrong about fundamentalism being the danger. That said, across the globe, fundamentalist muslims far outnumber fundamentalist christians, and they're the ones actively expanding their adherent population and taking over countries.

Why do you think we shouldn't be concerned about a large and expanding global population of fundamentalists that have growing populations in western countries?
Click to expand...
Again: see Project 2025.

I wish that I were exaggerating but I’m not.
 
Emily Lake said:
Look, are you guys afraid that if you acknowledge that islam as a religion is incompatible with western liberal values, that you'll be called an islamaphobe and you'll lose friends for being a bigot?
Click to expand...

Since I live in NYC where nearly a million people are Muslim and the vast, vast majority are law-abiding and hard-working, I know for a fact from personal experience that Islam is NOT incompatible with “western liberal values,” whatever that means exactly. A tiny sliver of Muslims are extremists. I don’t even know how this is an issue.

I am of Polish descent and when about a hundred years ago Polish immigrants were flocking to Hamtramck for jobs everyone was screaming about how Polish Catholics were incompatible with Western values and were “taking over” the city. The film Gangs of New York shows how Irish Catholic immigrants were trashed in the 19th century.

As far as I am concerned the Hamtramck Pole thing worked out pretty well because my grandmother lived there her whole life and my father was raised there. I recently posted a link to a Detroit Free Press article about how the current Muslim presence in Hamtramck, with its Muslim mayor, is for the most part working out pretty well. There are some things I don’t like, particularly with respect to women and gays, but the same problems exist in America as a whole with the drive for a Christian oligarchal theorcracy. I don’t think that drive will succeed but it’s a definite threat. In this country I am much more concerned with Christian theocrats than Islamic theocrats.
 
I think it should be obvious, too, that a lot of Islamic extremism is a reaction to Western imperialism and exploitation. This fact does not excuse violent terrorist acts, but provides a context for understanding why they occur.
 
I posted the link to the Freep (standard nickname for the Detroit Free Press) article in response to the claim by Lil’ Derec that Islamists had taken over Hamtramck. Like a hostile takeover in the corporate world, I guess. I suppose he thinks “Islamists” have imposed Sharia law there.

They have not.

Response from Derec?

🦗 🦗🦗

As always happens when his bullshit is refuted.
 
Emily Lake said:
Toni said:
Emily Lake said:
You are all off your rockers. You're letting your own hatred of christianity blind you to an objective application of skeptical atheism.
Click to expand...
Who hates Christianity? Not me!

Are you letting your hatred of Islam blind you?

Right now, there is a rise in fundamentalism in Christianity and in Islam that is frankly against the core teachings of both religions, which is only serving to spur hatred and conflict—and enormous profits. Look at the money trail!

Or look at the former Soviet Union and post Revolutionary China and their suppression of all religion. Did it make them less authoritarian? More tolerant?
Click to expand...
You're the one who has opined that christianity is at least as big a risk as islam is. Whether you consider it against the core teachings of the religions or not, I think it's willfully blind to look at the state of islam-dominated countries versus christian-dominated countries and come to the conclusion that they're equally dangerous.
Click to expand...
Generalizing about a vast group as though the actions of a few of their number represented the whole is the mainstay of bigotry and it is always transparent as hell. You should not be so proud of your scorn for reason.
 
Emily Lake said:
Toni said:
Emily Lake said:
You are all off your rockers. You're letting your own hatred of christianity blind you to an objective application of skeptical atheism.
Click to expand...
Who hates Christianity? Not me!

Are you letting your hatred of Islam blind you?

Right now, there is a rise in fundamentalism in Christianity and in Islam that is frankly against the core teachings of both religions, which is only serving to spur hatred and conflict—and enormous profits. Look at the money trail!

Or look at the former Soviet Union and post Revolutionary China and their suppression of all religion. Did it make them less authoritarian? More tolerant?
Click to expand...
You're the one who has opined that christianity is at least as big a risk as islam is. Whether you consider it against the core teachings of the religions or not, I think it's willfully blind to look at the state of islam-dominated countries versus christian-dominated countries and come to the conclusion that they're equally dangerous.
Click to expand...
Russia is a Christian country. I happen to think it is more dangerous than any Islam country. Something tells me I am not alone in that view.

In the 20th century, one would be hard pressed to deny that Christian countries weren’t the most dangerous countries.

Islamic countries may be more dangerous to their own population compared to Christian countries now, but European Christian countries and the USA are more dangerous to their regions.
 
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
Emily Lake said:
Oh no Bob, there's a ravenous polar bear climbing over our back fence right now!
Calm down Sally, it's nothing to be concerned about. Two hundred years ago there were mountain lions eating people just a mile away!
Click to expand...
I live in New England. I don't have to worry about polar bears. Black bears are more common where I live even if polar bears are stronger. Ergo, the risk of a polar bear < the risk of a black bear for me.
Click to expand...
... said the giant Lake Placid crocodile.
 
Elixir said:
Elixir said:
Bomb#20 said:
Nobody claimed Xtians are "better" than Muslim people.
Click to expand...
“Islam is the problem” belies that assertion
Click to expand...
Apology. You’re right. Separating religions from their adherents avoids the comparison.
Elixir said:
Bomb#20 said:
Communism is also better than Christianity
Click to expand...
So is peanut butter.
Somewhere here, lies a category error.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Well, the obvious error was the out-of-context quote that reversed the meaning. I said Communism is better than Christianity at mobilizing its assholes. Since mobilizing assholes is a negative trait, not anything to be proud of, that means I was claiming Communism is worse than Christianity, at least in that respect. Not sure if there's a technical name for your fallacy but "category error" it ain't. But assuming we correct the quote, your category error becomes apparent: no, peanut butter isn't better at mobilizing its assholes than Christianity. Peanut butter isn't in the category "things with assholes". :poke_with_stick:

Now, if you want to claim that I committed a category error, get the polarity right. Can you show "Communism is worse than Christianity" is a category error?

Not worth arguing. Emily’s emotional outbursts rarely are.
Click to expand...
Still applies.
Click to expand...
Nobody's making you reply to her.
 
laughing dog said:
Emily Lake said:
Toni said:
Emily Lake said:
You are all off your rockers. You're letting your own hatred of christianity blind you to an objective application of skeptical atheism.
Click to expand...
Who hates Christianity? Not me!

Are you letting your hatred of Islam blind you?

Right now, there is a rise in fundamentalism in Christianity and in Islam that is frankly against the core teachings of both religions, which is only serving to spur hatred and conflict—and enormous profits. Look at the money trail!

Or look at the former Soviet Union and post Revolutionary China and their suppression of all religion. Did it make them less authoritarian? More tolerant?
Click to expand...
You're the one who has opined that christianity is at least as big a risk as islam is. Whether you consider it against the core teachings of the religions or not, I think it's willfully blind to look at the state of islam-dominated countries versus christian-dominated countries and come to the conclusion that they're equally dangerous.
Click to expand...
Russia is a Christian country. I happen to think it is more dangerous than any Islam country. Something tells me I am not alone in that view.
Click to expand...

I don’t think Russia is dangerous because of orthodox Christianity, but because of Putin and his henchmen. Of course the Russian Orthodox Church supports the war in Ukraine if for no other reason than because it has to. Still, the Orthodox Church is a threat to human rights in its own regard. But it should also be recalled that in the 20th century the Soviets suppressed religion, I do not support any government suppression of religion.
laughing dog said:
In the 20th century, one would be hard pressed to deny that Christian countries weren’t the most dangerous countries.
Click to expand...

I am skeptical that Christianity had much if anything to do with the wars of the 20th century, although the Vatican cozied up to Hitler when he appeared to be winning. Hitler himself mocked Christianity and praised Islam, saying the latter religion would have been a better fit for Germany.
 
Bomb#20 said:
Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
Emily Lake said:
Oh no Bob, there's a ravenous polar bear climbing over our back fence right now!
Calm down Sally, it's nothing to be concerned about. Two hundred years ago there were mountain lions eating people just a mile away!
Click to expand...
I live in New England. I don't have to worry about polar bears. Black bears are more common where I live even if polar bears are stronger. Ergo, the risk of a polar bear < the risk of a black bear for me.
Click to expand...
... said the giant Lake Placid crocodile.
Click to expand...

I preferred Mega Python vs. Gatoroid because it had both Debbie Gibson and Tiffany.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom