quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

This is an often repeated argument just as Peon says…but this statement in itself is self condemning. Just as with the proliferation of guns in American which is the obvious cause of so much death and injury…so is the obvious proliferation of radicalism in the Muslim religion.

It does amuse me how Peon and others rant on about guns in American yet continue to deny the obvious problems in the Muslim religion. They condemn, rightly in my opinion, those that deny the problems with the killing of innocents with the careless use and availability of guns. Yet crucify those that point out the lack of responsibility of Muslims to control the radicals among them.

There have been too many arguments over the small radical part of Islam… too often so called moderate Muslims must be defended on these boards… Muslims need to defend themselves by killing the radicalism in their religion. Because if they don’t… they are guilty just as you say.

Butch

Are all Christians responsible for Christian terrorism?
http://www.alternet.org/tea-party-and-right/10-worst-terror-attacks-extreme-christians-and-far-right-white-men

It's an attack by ISIS, a group presenting itself as a country. So go to war with them--not, for example, Indonesia, simply because they're Muslim, or the US, because 5% of the country is Muslim.

Nor, as some are posting, is anyone saying "coddle them" or "they're misunderstood" or "we shouldn't go after them."

Just that "them" isn't 20% of the world's population scattered all over the globe. And yes, if anyone whos thinks that *is* them has filled the space reserved for "ability to reason" with "ignorance, bias, racism and xenophobia."

Now...we ready to simply go after the ISIS threat? Or are we too busy blaming others?

And by the way....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/africa/tens-of-thousands-of-muslims-flee-christian-militias-in-central-african-republic/2014/02/07/5a1adbb2-9032-11e3-84e1-27626c5ef5fb_story.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/14/are-all-terrorists-muslims-it-s-not-even-close.html

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b

quote:

yes because the atheists of the world past and present are such a peace loving lot...

Compared to religious people, yes, atheists are much more peaceful. The fact that every atheist that has ever lived has not been peaceful in no way changes the reality that religion is orders of magnitude more violent than atheism. At most only the depredations of communism can attributed to people who called themselves atheists (people who, in fact, worshiped their own egos). All the other great horrors of history had some sort of religions motivation or, at least, justification. But I am not just talking about the great crimes of history. I am also talking smaller violations of human dignity as well. I'm talking about the Kim Davis' of the world who would deprive others of their rights simply because she thinks some god (who doesn't actually exist) doesn't approve. As an atheist, I am not required to hate and be intolerant of gay people.

quote:

and because all the religious people except for a slice of islam are so off the wall violent...

No. Not all religions are off the wall violent but all of the big ones have had their off the wall violent factions at one time or another. Again, however, the problem is not just off the wall violence but a host of other problems religion creates. One example: the efforts of American evangelists to deprive America's children of a science education.

quote:

because our founding fathers, when they made the free practice of religion an essential characteristic of our nation, were really just children...

Actually, they had the forethought to restrict religion's power by demanding equal treatment of religions as well as establishing a wall between church and state. They did this because, far from being children, they knew how terrible things could get if one religion were allowed to gain power over the government and the people.

quote:

because the desire for others to "give up religion" could never turn into something amazingly violent and persecutory itself...

You have a tendency to extrapolate things to their most ridiculousness extremes and then treat the end result as if it were a legitimate argument. Sure it is possible that a secular movement could turn into a mass persecution. But is it probable? The commonality between a religious and non-religious persecution movement is the belief in the infallibility of the ideology. It is when people surrender their minds to an ideology that mass murder becomes likely. The bottom line remains that religious people are more susceptible to such "thinking" than atheists since religious people are already conditioned to believe in nonsense and be unquestionably obedient to authority. It is by being an atheist that I am free to treat other people with respect and dignity because I am not required to hate them in order to please a god.

quote:

as far as Christianity goes---people do what they do out of a love of god and as disciples of Christ---take that away and the people, and the world is are lesser place for it...

People doing what they do out of a love of god and christ (or allah) is precisely the problem! Kim Davis denies homosexuals their rights out of love of god! ISIS beheads people and shoots people and rapes women out of love of god! I know there are people who consider themselves good because they are religious. More than likely, they are good despite being religious. I know decent people who call themselves christian and get upset when someone refers to people like the Phelps clan as christians. "We are the true christians," they like to proclaim. I would argue that they have it backwards. One need only read the Bible to see that, in fact, the Phelps clan is more representative of true christianity.

A world without religion would not solve all problems . . . but it would eliminate a great many.

quote:

At most only the depredations of communism can attributed to people who called themselves atheists (people who, in fact, worshiped their own egos).

quote:

we should no longer do is make excuses for the 1.65 billion that through inaction encourage the radical element of their religion to continue the slaughter of innocents.

How many more threads such as these will we have... How many more times will you defend the religion that produces these dark age uncivilized murderers... Will it take a love one of yours slaughtered to change your mind?

We need to demand that Islam through the powers of the religious states in the Muslim world stand up together and excise the radical element from their theocracy's. They need to educate and guide their children and turn them away from radicalism and universally condemn those that don't. Then we need to support them in this endeavor.

quote:

if you think true Christianity is religion, you don't know Christianity. Great deal many differences between Christianity and religion. One is in Christianity, God is not dead. Muslim, the prophet is dead. two. faith is all that is required to aquire eternal life in Christianity, you have to do what some mullah says you are to do in the muslim beliefs...that includes killing.
And finally in Christiany, Christ did not sin, where as the prophet did.

one other point, this muslim rage is not about isreal, never has been. Classic case of the have nots essentially throwing a temper tantrum.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

we should no longer do is make excuses for the 1.65 billion that through inaction encourage the radical element of their religion to continue the slaughter of innocents.

How many more threads such as these will we have... How many more times will you defend the religion that produces these dark age uncivilized murderers... Will it take a love one of yours slaughtered to change your mind?

We need to demand that Islam through the powers of the religious states in the Muslim world stand up together and excise the radical element from their theocracy's. They need to educate and guide their children and turn them away from radicalism and universally condemn those that don't. Then we need to support them in this endeavor.

Again: where have I defended the religion? Butch, you are arguing with some silly bogeyman inside your own brain, not with me. When I said that I hated all religions, with Islam being at the forefront at present- what combination of those words led you to conclude that I was defending Islam?

Try to see past the bollocks about political correctness and 'do gooding' that your thought-controllers tell you lies behind the thinking of *all* those on the left *at all times*. I'm interested in working out a) who is the right enemy to deal with b) how best to deal with that enemy. What I'm *not* interested in is another little adventure, like Bush and Blair's war on Iraq, which was the central cause of ISIL's existence in the first place. That is: a war against the wrong people, in the wrong way, and leaving the situation even more fucked up and lethally dangerous than it was to start with.

quote:

Between Stalin and Mao alone, those depredations took untold millions of lives.

quote:

As for whether they were "real" atheists, isn't that a bit No True Scotsman?

quote:

Bottom line who did stalin murder/kill that did not have it comming?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc2b
...
A world without religion would not solve all problems . . . but it would eliminate a great many.

quote:

Considering that both Stalin and Mao demanded blind faith and obedience, two necessary ingredients in any religion, that assertion is debatable.

quote:

the human race would be much better off without religion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Muse this is just lip service... no substance.. these radicals do not live in a vacuum.. when their neighbors start pointing them out to authorities and Muslim states root them out then I will agree with you.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Muse this is just lip service... no substance.. these radicals do not live in a vacuum.. when their neighbors start pointing them out to authorities and Muslim states root them out then I will agree with you.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

I call on the United Nations and all rational thinking countries to immediately suspend the Geneva Convention and take this war to the people WHERE they live, in their homes, their grocery stores, their houses of worship, the schools they attend, wherever they may be at any time they may be there until this fungus is wiped off the face of the Earth, down to the last person who supports this ideology and these people.

The Paris killers have been identified as native French speakers according to some reports. The BBC is reporting that the French police have identified one of the thugs as a French national using DNA. We aren't talking about a purely Middle Eastern phenomenon. You will find activists/sympathisers in most countries.

We are talking about people motivated by ideology, using real and legitimate grievances to promote their murderous hate. The question is how does one defeat an idea? And the only thing we really know for certain is that you cannot defeat an idea with a strategy that relies on military means alone.

That seems to make the strategy you propose redundant before it even starts.

You say that military means alone are not enough. What do you suggest be used ALONG WITH military means? Or do you support other measures to the exclusion of military means? If so, what are THOSE measures?

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

I call on the United Nations and all rational thinking countries to immediately suspend the Geneva Convention and take this war to the people WHERE they live, in their homes, their grocery stores, their houses of worship, the schools they attend, wherever they may be at any time they may be there until this fungus is wiped off the face of the Earth, down to the last person who supports this ideology and these people.

The Paris killers have been identified as native French speakers according to some reports. The BBC is reporting that the French police have identified one of the thugs as a French national using DNA. We aren't talking about a purely Middle Eastern phenomenon. You will find activists/sympathisers in most countries.

We are talking about people motivated by ideology, using real and legitimate grievances to promote their murderous hate. The question is how does one defeat an idea? And the only thing we really know for certain is that you cannot defeat an idea with a strategy that relies on military means alone.

That seems to make the strategy you propose redundant before it even starts.

I actually couldn't care if they were Norwegians, Spanish or from OshKosh Wisconsin, or if they spoke fluent French, Russian or English.

Their time is up.