Post by: Spacey on April 28, 2006, 12:09:31 pm
Quote from: Lexington
I Love Virgins 4 Life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by: Lexington on April 28, 2006, 11:56:39 am
And Jesus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Virgin Mary 4 Life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by: FrankZappa on April 28, 2006, 08:38:24 am
Post by: Todd on April 28, 2006, 08:03:53 am
(https://thebreakfast.info/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fhome.versateladsl.be%2Fvt637630%2Fimg2%2Fpopedevil.jpg&hash=7dea7b875fccee734a4c432b71781369af193f39)
Post by: FrankZappa on April 28, 2006, 05:07:16 am
Post by: derickw on April 27, 2006, 01:57:42 pm
!["Image]("http://img242.imageshack.us/img242/7371/emperorbenedict17tm.jpg")
Post by: davepeck on April 04, 2006, 01:55:41 pm
Post by: kindm's on April 04, 2006, 11:34:19 am
Quote from: FrankZappa
Still rings true:QuoteWhen I, a thoughtful and unblessed Presbyterian, examine the Koran, I know that beyond any question every Mohammedan is insane; not in all things, but in religious matters. When a thoughtful and unblessed Mohammedan examines the Westminster Catechism, he knows that beyond any question I am spiritually insane. I cannot prove to him that he is insane, because you never can prove anything to a lunatic?for that is a part of his insanity and the evidence of it. He cannot prove to me that I am insane, for my mind has the same defect that afflicts his... When I look around me, I am often troubled to see how many people are mad."
-Samuel Langhorne Clemens
Waiting to see how many people ask who Samuel L. Clemens is :sigh:
wasn\'t he a character who Woody Harelson played on cheers ;)
Post by: FrankZappa on April 04, 2006, 07:10:09 am
Quote
When I, a thoughtful and unblessed Presbyterian, examine the Koran, I know that beyond any question every Mohammedan is insane; not in all things, but in religious matters. When a thoughtful and unblessed Mohammedan examines the Westminster Catechism, he knows that beyond any question I am spiritually insane. I cannot prove to him that he is insane, because you never can prove anything to a lunatic—for that is a part of his insanity and the evidence of it. He cannot prove to me that I am insane, for my mind has the same defect that afflicts his... When I look around me, I am often troubled to see how many people are mad."
-Samuel Langhorne Clemens
Waiting to see how many people ask who Samuel L. Clemens is :sigh:
Post by: wildcoyote on March 30, 2006, 02:47:24 pm
Post by: Spacey on March 30, 2006, 02:24:25 pm
Quote from: Todd
I say it was all just a ploy by the wife. Now she gets to sleep around for 100 days and figure out if she still wants to be with her husband.....legally!
now that you shine the light on it that way...
Post by: Todd on March 30, 2006, 02:02:21 pm
Post by: Spacey on March 30, 2006, 01:06:51 pm
Post by: Wolfman on March 30, 2006, 12:40:46 pm
http://www.boston.com/news/odd/articles/2006/03/28/man_accidentally_divorces_wife_in_sleep/
Man accidentally divorces wife in sleep[/B]
March 28, 2006
NEW DELHI --Village elders ordered a Muslim man in eastern India to leave his wife after he accidentally divorced her in his sleep, a news report said Tuesday.
Aftab Ansari uttered the Urdu word for divorce, "talaq," three times in his sleep, prompting his worried wife to discuss the matter with her friends, according to the Press Trust of India news agency.
Under Islamic law, a husband need only say "I divorce you" three times to secure a permanent end to his marriage.
Muslim leaders in the couple\'s village in West Bengal state found out and decreed that Ansari\'s unconscious utterances constituted a divorce, PTI reported.
But 30-year-old Ansari said he had no intention of leaving his wife of 11 years.
"I have not given talaq. When I uttered talaq three times I had taken medicines to help me sleep," he was quoted as saying in the report.
The religious leaders said that before remarrying, the couple would have to be apart for at least 100 days and that the wife, Sohela, would also have to spend a night with another man and then be divorced by him.
PTI reported that the couple has been ostracized because of their refusal to abide by the decision of the village leaders.
* * *
Did you see that part in bold?!?!?! rotfl And how about the wife telling the whole village what the poor dude said in his sleep! Not a good idea. Or maybe she made it up to divorce him. Either way she\'s either very dumb or very conniving, so if I were him I\'d just go through with it at this point.
Post by: FrankZappa on March 25, 2006, 08:46:26 am
Post by: Todd on March 25, 2006, 08:17:53 am
Quote from: FrankZappa
Ok Mr.PickyMcPickenPants, I was referring mainly to his family, and also the government entities involved...........................happy now??? :biggrin:Quote from: Todd"This is a case that the family of the person brought against him. We are watching it closely and Afghanistan also respects human rights."
:holyshit: These people are just WAAAYYYY too **** up!!!!! :sigh:
Before we go with a statement as broad as "these people", remember that "those americans" recently burnt a bunch of churches (http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/08/alabama.churches/) in the south as a \'joke\'...
please don\'t generalize. It deprives your argument of all credibility.
Post by: FrankZappa on March 25, 2006, 05:51:55 am
Quote from: Todd
"This is a case that the family of the person brought against him. We are watching it closely and Afghanistan also respects human rights."
:holyshit: These people are just WAAAYYYY too **** up!!!!! :sigh:
Before we go with a statement as broad as "these people", remember that "those americans" recently burnt a bunch of churches (http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/08/alabama.churches/) in the south as a \'joke\'...
please don\'t generalize. It deprives your argument of all credibility.
Post by: Todd on March 24, 2006, 08:22:40 pm
:holyshit: These people are just WAAAYYYY too **** up!!!!! :sigh:
Post by: FrankZappa on March 24, 2006, 04:35:01 pm
Quote from: wildcoyote
"The very purpose of religion is to control yourself, not to criticise others. Rather, we must criticise ourselves. How much am I doing about my anger? About my attachment, about my hatred, about my pride, my jealousy? These are the things which we must check in daily life" - Tenzin Gyatso, 14th (current) Dalai Lama
:thumbsup:
Post by: wildcoyote on March 24, 2006, 10:55:03 am
Post by: Me! on March 24, 2006, 10:37:37 am
Post by: davepeck on March 24, 2006, 10:36:08 am
Quote
The Afghan government says it is up to the judiciary to decide the fate of Abdul Rahman, 41, who might face the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity.
Post by: Wolfman on February 21, 2006, 12:13:38 pm
Today\'s story features a freelance priest who goes around to the funerals of slain American soldiers and has his followers cheer their death because "America harbors homosexuals." So you\'ve got these devasted families at their kid\'s funeral, and hanging out 50 feet away are these weirdos saying how great it is that he is dead. Well hey, at least we can rest assured that this particular priest isn\'t molesting little boys.
Meanwhile, a gang of patriotic bikers follows around the priest\'s gang to try and block them from the funerals. I like the bikers...but really folks..no religion, none of this happens.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/02/21/funeral.motorcyclists.ap/index.html
Quote from: cnn.com
FORT CAMPBELL, Kentucky (AP) -- Wearing vests covered in military patches, a band of motorcyclists rolls around the country from one soldier\'s funeral to another, cheering respectfully to overshadow jeers from church protesters.
They call themselves the Patriot Guard Riders, and they are more than 5,000 strong, forming to counter anti-gay protests held by the Rev. Fred Phelps at military funerals.
Phelps believes American deaths in Iraq are divine punishment for a country that he says harbors homosexuals. His protesters carry signs thanking God for so-called IEDs -- explosives that are a major killer of soldiers in Iraq.
The bikers shield the families of dead soldiers from the protesters, and overshadow the jeers with patriotic chants and a sea of red, white and blue flags.
"The most important thing we can do is let families know that the nation cares," said Don Woodrick, the group\'s Kentucky captain. "When a total stranger gets on a motorcycle in the middle of winter and drives 300 miles to hold a flag, that makes a powerful statement."
At least 14 states are considering laws aimed at the funeral protesters, who at a recent memorial service at Fort Campbell wrapped themselves in upside-down American flags. They danced and sang impromptu songs peppered with vulgarities that condemned homosexuals and soldiers.
The Patriot Guard was also there, waving up a ruckus of support for the families across the street. Community members came in the freezing rain to chant "U-S-A, U-S-A" alongside them.
"This is just the right thing to do. This is something America didn\'t do in the \'70s," said Kurt Mayer, the group\'s national spokesman. "Whether we agree with why we\'re over there, these soldiers are dying to protect our freedoms."
Shirley Phelps-Roper, a daughter of Fred Phelps and an attorney for the Topeka, Kansas-based church, said neither state laws nor the Patriot Guard can silence their message that God killed the soldiers because they fought for a country that embraces homosexuals.
"The scriptures are crystal clear that when God sets out to punish a nation, it is with the sword. An IED is just a broken-up sword," Phelps-Roper said. "Since that is his weapon of choice, our forum of choice has got to be a dead soldier\'s funeral."
The church, Westboro Baptist Church, is not affiliated with a larger denomination and is made up mostly of Fred Phelps\' extended family members.
During the 1990s, church members were known mostly for picketing the funerals of AIDS victims, and they have long been tracked as a hate group by the Montgomery, Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center\'s Intelligence Project.
The project\'s deputy director, Heidi Beirich, said other groups have tried to counter Phelps\' message, but none has been as organized as the Patriot Guard.
"I\'m not sure anybody has gone to this length to stand in solidarity," she said. "It\'s nice that these veterans and their supporters are trying to do something. I can\'t imagine anything worse, your loved one is killed in Iraq and you\'ve got to deal with Fred Phelps."
Kentucky, home to sprawling Fort Campbell along the Tennessee line, was among the first states to attempt to deal with Phelps legislatively. Its House and Senate have each passed bills that would limit people from protesting within 300 feet of a funeral or memorial service. The Senate version would also keep protesters from being within earshot of grieving friends and family members.
Richard Wilbur, a retired police detective, said his Indiana Patriot Guard group only comes to funerals if invited by family. He said he has no problem with protests against the war but sees no place for objectors at a family\'s final goodbye to a soldier.
"No one deserves this," he said.
Post by: jocelyn on February 16, 2006, 01:14:29 pm
By the way, 3 of the craziest Christians I know go to Nondenominational churches. ;)
I agree witht Seth, the negatives do seem to be equal to the positives.... but it\'s hard to measure something like that. Most of the stories of people helped by religion will probably go unheard because they are small and private and not as dramatic as beating cancer. But then again, I suppose that goes the other way as well...
I actually just realized that I have no desire to talk about this at all. I think what is being said now in this thread has been said a gazillion times... it\'s exahusting... so I\'ma leave this one to you guys. Have fun with it....
Post by: leith on February 16, 2006, 10:59:56 am
Quote from: Wolfman
If someone\'s faith in an organzied religion really helps them get through a tough time then I\'m all for it. The problem is that for every person helped by organized religion, another is hurt. For every person who gets through a tough day with religion, there is someone else throwing a rock at people becuause of religion. For every person who uses relgion to help get them through something really traumatic like cancer, another person is killed over religion. There\'s got to be ways to be spiritual that are simply good and don\'t support these religions that inspire so much violence and hatred.There are plenty of Nondenominational Christians such as myself that do not support the organized Church but do hold Jesus Christ as their Savior and Higher Power.
I am sure there are many people that use a religion as a guide in their life w/o supporting the organized aspect of said religion.
There are also people that are just spiritual w/ no name to their higher power yet still using the tenets laid out by most of the world\'s religions.
The only difference I have ever really found between all the different major faiths is what they call God.
Most religions @ their core are just guidellines on how to live w/ those around you.
So I think there are ways that people are spiritual w/o organized religion it is just going to take another 1000 years for the cycle to reach the point where organized religion is tossed. Hopefully.
Post by: Wolfman on February 16, 2006, 10:09:43 am
Post by: leith on February 16, 2006, 12:33:30 am
Quote from: oldnewbie
i believe that positive thinking and attitude can be extremely helpful and important....and if faith in god helps a person achieve that healing than that\'s great...whatever gets you there.....but i don\'t believe that god has a damn thing to do about itAnd you have every right to think that.
Post by: oldnewbie on February 16, 2006, 12:13:58 am
Post by: leith on February 16, 2006, 12:05:53 am
Quote from: oldnewbie
how about when a person who survives a major disease ie. cancer, credits their faith for helping them "beat" the disease. do those people seriously think that their faith was stronger than the person who worships god but doesn\'t beat cancer? god weighed all the options and decided to have mercy on me but said **** you to that guy over there because of his or my faith. if god really has a "plan"....i think he better recheck his notes.
Sorry to disagree but it has been PROVEN that state of mind is very important to one surviving ANY major trauma.
One\'s faith is a huge way to stay positive and help the body reach a better healing state.
If that person believes that their higher power is helping them so be it.
There is a reason anyone that has a major illness has a religious contact of their choice on the treatment team.
Post by: Wolfman on February 15, 2006, 11:27:30 pm
Quote from: oldnewbie
how about when a person who survives a major disease ie. cancer, credits their faith for helping them "beat" the disease. do those people seriously think that their faith was stronger than the person who worships god but doesn\'t beat cancer? god weighed all the options and decided to have mercy on me but said **** you to that guy over there because of his or my faith. if god really has a "plan"....i think he better recheck his notes.
Yeah and forget the doctors who were there with them every step of the way and the people who spent their whole lives researching the treatment methods that helped save them. Nope, they were saved by a Jewish carpenter who died 2006 years ago. Ugh.
Post by: Spacey on February 15, 2006, 08:12:43 pm
Post by: oldnewbie on February 15, 2006, 07:50:51 pm
Post by: boombox on February 15, 2006, 07:18:39 pm
Quote from: Wolfman
Quote from: boomboxI\'m not quite with Wolfman on this - not all are equally to blame... I was baptised a Christian and attended a Church school until the age of 11, by which time I had already worked out what a load of crap organised religions are.
boombox, you\'re exactly with me on this one. My whole point is your last sentence up there. I just can\'t believe you figured it all out at age 11, that\'s pretty sharp.
What is even funnier is that for the following three years in high school, I consistently got the highest mark in Religous Studiess, no doubt beause I approached the subject objectively. They begged me to do it as an O level certificicate, bu it clashed with German so it died a death.
Post by: kindm's on February 15, 2006, 09:51:52 am
Prior to any centralized society it was religion that kept people in check. It was the religious leaders who decided who had property rights. Most of the religions loose all credibility in my eyes when they start talking about excluding people. Namely women. Most of the strict interpretations of the big 3 (Islam, Judism, Christianity) basically say women are worthless and should be shunned at best.
That just proves that the rules so to speak were made up by a bunch of men (not God). I find it very interesting also that all of the 3 major religions were all developed in the same part of the world. Like all of the folks in China where somehow uninportant to God that he decded to foresake them all. I mean if in ancient times you want to get a message out on a wide scale you go to where the most people are and that would have been China. In those years they were already having natural disasters that were wiping out millions. So we are supposed to believe that God only cares about the people of a very specific region.
You would think if God had a message for all of his/her children he/she wouldn\'t be hindered by borders or geography etc. He / she would just deliver said message on to us. Why would God speak only to specific folks ? How is that efficent ? how does that get his / her teaching to the masses w/o being co-opted for exploitation.
If you look at Islam it has a much more daily impact on folks lives. They are supposed to pray 5 times a day (thats more than most people use the bathroom in a given day). They are always supposed to go to the mosque to do it (I may be incorrect about this) so there is the constant mosque / person interaction. There is very little time away from whatever message is being taught in those places. Good or bad. It would be like if you watched O\'rielly 5 times a day and already had a predisposition to believing what he said. In a very short amount of time your views would be pretty skewed and then they would continually be reinforced through constant exsposure to like minded people.
Post by: Wolfman on February 15, 2006, 07:56:46 am
Quote from: boombox
I\'m not quite with Wolfman on this - not all are equally to blame... I was baptised a Christian and attended a Church school until the age of 11, by which time I had already worked out what a load of crap organised religions are.
boombox, you\'re exactly with me on this one. My whole point is your last sentence up there. I just can\'t believe you figured it all out at age 11, that\'s pretty sharp. Judaism started my brainwashing at age 11 and it took me until 16 to snap out of it. The only thing I disagree with is trying to make a case of how any one religion has beat up another one disproportionately. (Especially using the crusades as an example...that is so 12th Century!) Look, they\'ve all done 1,000,000 things to each other. They\'re all equally guilty. And when you pay your temple membership dues or put money in the collection plate, you\'re supporting the latest rounds of suicide bombers, rioters, abortion-clinic shooters. We\'d be so much better off if none of this had ever existed.
Post by: antbach on February 14, 2006, 09:32:23 pm
Post by: jocelyn on February 14, 2006, 08:38:59 pm
Quote from: antbach
I actually skipped a good portion of this thread. I don\'t like arguing religion and/or politics. But someone in there said something about extremists being the voice of Islam. I agree, but feel this is the media\'s fault for portraying it in such a way. I also feel that our country is very racist in the manner of religion. This country was built on freedom of religion (I think, I hate history, its history, its done, its over), and our citizens are hypocrites for feeling that Muslims are evil because they interpret the extremists as what the religion is. Islam, whether Americans want to believe it or not, is one of the most popular religions in the world. There are gazillions of Muslims who do not fit the profile, but people overlook that because alls they ever hear and read about is extremists and their terror.
I don\'t think it\'s the media\'s fault entirely. They have become the voice of Islam because they are speaking the loudest. They are the ones who make themselves public. The millions of moderate Muslims are very quient about their dissent with the extremists, if it exists. This is a thing I have yet to understand... why do more Muslim religious leaders not condemn Islamic extremism when they MUST be aware of the damage they are doing to the world\'s view of their religion? Part of the deep silence on the part of the moderate Muslims I\'m sure is due to terror... no one wants to cross radicals and risk getting their head blown off. But I don\'t think we can blame the media entirely for covering stories of violence and radicalism. I think it is partly up to the non crazy lunatic Muslims to speak for themselves and make themselves heard... just like it\'s up to you and I to defy the image that THEY probably have of Americans. You wouldn\'t depend on THEIR media to accurately depict US, if we never make ourselves heard, would you?
Post by: antbach on February 14, 2006, 07:54:43 pm
Yea, I could probably go on, but seeing as much of that probably doesn\'t make any logical sense (maybe I should read it over, nah, too much effort), I won\'t.
For the record, I haven\'t been to church since I was 3 except for weddings and funerals, so I have no religious knowledge or affiliation (besides baptism) at this point in my life.
Post by: kindm's on February 14, 2006, 05:58:45 pm
The paperr published several cartoons depicting their prophet. The majority were tame political satire. According to their beef any depiction of mohammed is a problem so it doesn\'t matter what they published. Now when the imans from denmark recently traveled to the middle east they brought theses cartoons published in the paper as well as others that were more insulting that were not published.
The folks in the middle east act like a bunch of spoiled children. The controlling powers over there seem hell bent on depicting themsleves as savage brainless idiots. Sure there have been acts on both sides that are reprehensible but nothing about these cartoons should cost people their lives. it is really sad.
The crusades were a long time ago, sure but they discuss them in the middle east like it was yesterday. Stories of campaigns are still told to this day. So it was a long time ago for us but they hear the stories all the time. But they had just as many atrocities as the christians so dont fool yourself. And depending on whos history you believe you could make a claim that they stole it from someone else (the holy land).
They should never have given the land to the Jews. They should have made the land a UN controlled territory and made it a place for the world. That would have gone a long way to easing everyones issues IMHO. But there is no going back now.
Post by: boombox on February 14, 2006, 05:27:43 pm
As an atheist of thirty years, I personally couldn\'t give two hoots about God, Allah, Buddha, Mithras or even Zeus. However, I do respect the right of others to believe in any religion they like, providing they don\'t try to force it on me *, a right which should be respected and tolerated, whatever others might think. Similarly, their religion should not be attacked in this way. I do know a lot of Muslims and they are horrified and worried by what is happening, recognising the greater alienation recent events are causing.
* they\'d fail incidentally. :wink:
I must admit, it\'s good to have such an educated debate here - makes a change from the freddie-leith battles.
I\'ll leave the last word to Lemmy, however. It says it all:
I am the one, Orgasmatron, the outstretched grasping hand
My image is of agony, my servants **** the land
Obsequies and arrogant, clandestine and vain
Two thousand years of misery, of torture in my name
Hypocrisy made paramount, paranoia the law
My name is called religion, sadistic sacred ****
I twist the truth, I rule the world,
my crown is called deceit
I am the emperor of lies, you grovel at my feet
I rob you and I slaughter you, your downfall is my gain
And all my promises are lies, all my love is hate
I am the politician, and i decide your fate
I march before a martyred world, an army for the fight
I speak of great heroic days, of victory and might
I hold a banner drenched in blood, I urge you to be brave
I hold you to your destiny, I lead you to your grave
Your bones will build my palaces,
your eyes will stud my crown
For I am Mars, the god of war, and I will cut you down
Post by: Me! on February 14, 2006, 05:00:20 pm
Post by: jocelyn on February 14, 2006, 04:55:49 pm
That\'s bad logic. You can\'t use the Crusades as a reason for Muslims to be pissed off at Christianity NOW. There are plenty of reasons to be pissed at Christianity/Western Culture... but the Crusades just happened too long ago. Yes, you can see where ideas, prejudices, mentalities came from, but, people should evolve. Besides, being pissed off is no excuse to torch buildings.
As for Islam itself, when you look at it in the context of multitheistic societies prevalent at the time, it did put forward a reasonable case for a code for living. Christian bigots like to say that the tenets of Islam are the same as Christianity, but the majority of Christianity is derivative anyway: most of the major faiths have the same root beliefs and ideals. The initial intentions of Islam were good, but the minority extremists have hijacked Islam for their own ends, in exactly the same way as the West hijacked Christianity to serve its own.
Can\'t argue with any of that. It\'s a shame the way Muslim fascists have become the voice of their religion. It\'s also a shame that fundamentalist Christians have given so many more "normal" Christians a bad name. In the US today academics practically scoff at you if you admit to being religious, and a lot of this is probably due to a few crazy fanatics. There are certainly extremists in every direction and they all scare the living daylight out of me.
What happened with those cartoons is disgraceful. Their initial publication was nothing other than a childish act guaranteed to raise circulation, an act by people who know full well that to create an image of the Prophet is one of the worst crimes. No respect has been shown to the Islamic community. It doesn\'t matter whether we think such a ban on images is a stupid idea (as I do!): the press has a responsibility to be impartial (fat bloody chance!). If there was a cartoon showing Jesus in a stormtrooper\'s uniform, bayoneting a Jew, there would be similar disgust (if not more) and the politicians too would join in condemning it. And publishing them again in other papers, knowing the furore it would cause, shows just how low the tabloid press are.
Hmm I disagree here big time. It is NOT the job of a political cartoonist to be impartial. Not at ALL. If that cartoon was somehow represented as NEWS, sure, no slant please. But a political cartoonist has no more responsiblity to be impartial than someone writing an editorial does; it is opinion, and not expressed as anything more than such. A cartoonist can draw whatever they damn please, offensive or not, as long as it is not being labeled as news. It is up to the readers to make of it what they may. I have seen many a cartoon with Jesus depicted and have not heard of any buildings burning because of it. I\'m not saying the cartoons weren\'t insensitive; of course they were. But a cartoon is a cartoon, they are INHERENTLY insensitive. I don\'t hear anyone freaking out about he insensitivity of the 23576538745609570234567280 cartoons insulting GW. I do not think singling it out as a "childing act to increase circulation" is quite fair- isn\'t that what every single political cartoon ever has been? I sure as hell don\'t want to see political cartoonists suddenly become PC after this whole thing. They would be out of jobs for one, and secondly, the cartoons would be pointless. Should we start censoring these guys? Should they have to be politicaly correct all of the time? Should we stop printing that cartoon because we have been intimidated to do so by violence, thus fueling the fire over there to use violence in the name of religion as a means to an end?
However, I don\'t agree with the way some people have protested. Such actions have done more to damage their cause, than to help it. People have forgotten the reason why they are protesting - it is just the violence which sticks in their minds, further damning the majority of Muslims, who just feel hurt and debased by the actions of these newspapers.
Agreed. Although I know I myself can\'t speak for "the majority of Muslims." If they are all hurt and debased by a **** cartoon, no matter HOW offensive, well **** they need to get some thicker skin because the world ain\'t peaches and cream and there is always going to be someone insulting your beliefs. Ask any Christian who admits to being one in any Ivy League college.
Post by: Spacey on February 14, 2006, 04:27:57 pm
I wasn\'t really in the position to expand on my thought as I am at work and have to do it in between phone calls.
But, I totally agree.
Quote from: jocelyn
It\'s especially ridiculous because of how hypocritical it all is. They can insult any/every other religion, followers of anything other than Islam are infidels,etc... but a silly cartoon is some sort of huge assault on Islam. Come on now guys.
I am glad to hear you guys are following this; I considered starting a thread about it last week but decided against it.Quote from: SpaceyThe whole middle-east is a **** mess. Fighting battles that have been going on since at least 1187.
Don\'t worry, we should have it straightened out soon once we finish spreading democracy through the area. That should put an end to all of the area\'s deep-rooted problems.
Yeah, just like that other place in the Middle East that we introduced to Democracy and when the political party, Hamas, I believe won, we got pissed and tried to reverse it.
Post by: boombox on February 14, 2006, 04:10:29 pm
Quote from: Spacey
The Muslims since the middle-ages have shunned the Western Culture. For one reason or another they decided to not evolve as Western cultures became more industrialized and modern.
The whole middle-east is a **** mess. Fighting battles that have been going on since at least 1187.
However, they perhaps have every reason to be p***ed off with Christianity - look at the farce that was the Crusades? If that was Western Culture, no wonder they didn\'t see it as being particularly enlightening - in fact, western "civilisation" was, to a large extent, a giant step back. If you look at it all historically, more of the roots of science and culture come from the Middle East than anywhere else anyway.
As for Islam itself, when you look at it in the context of multitheistic societies prevalent at the time, it did put forward a reasonable case for a code for living. Christian bigots like to say that the tenets of Islam are the same as Christianity, but the majority of Christianity is derivative anyway: most of the major faiths have the same root beliefs and ideals. The initial intentions of Islam were good, but the minority extremists have hijacked Islam for their own ends, in exactly the same way as the West hijacked Christianity to serve its own.
What happened with those cartoons is disgraceful. Their initial publication was nothing other than a childish act guaranteed to raise circulation, an act by people who know full well that to create an image of the Prophet is one of the worst crimes. No respect has been shown to the Islamic community. It doesn\'t matter whether we think such a ban on images is a stupid idea (as I do!): the press has a responsibility to be impartial (fat bloody chance!). If there was a cartoon showing Jesus in a stormtrooper\'s uniform, bayoneting a Jew, there would be similar disgust (if not more) and the politicians too would join in condemning it. And publishing them again in other papers, knowing the furore it would cause, shows just how low the tabloid press are.
However, I don\'t agree with the way some people have protested. Such actions have done more to damage their cause, than to help it. People have forgotten the reason why they are protesting - it is just the violence which sticks in their minds, further damning the majority of Muslims, who just feel hurt and debased by the actions of these newspapers.
I\'m not quite with Wolfman on this - not all are equally to blame. But the extremist leaders and zealots of most religions are.
And by the way, no I am not a Muslim. I was baptised a Christian and attended a Church school until the age of 11, by which time I had already worked out what a load of crap organised religions are.
Post by: FrankZappa on February 14, 2006, 04:04:16 pm
That being said, this is not the first time somone has made an image of a man and sad it was mohamad, which have always been ignored for the most part. Why they are still going on this one the way they are is beyond me.
Post by: jocelyn on February 14, 2006, 03:54:21 pm
I am glad to hear you guys are following this; I considered starting a thread about it last week but decided against it.
Quote from: Spacey
The whole middle-east is a **** mess. Fighting battles that have been going on since at least 1187.
Don\'t worry, we should have it straightened out soon once we finish spreading democracy through the area. That should put an end to all of the area\'s deep-rooted problems.
Post by: Me! on February 14, 2006, 03:40:07 pm
Quote from: Wolfman
Another thing... if you\'re not allowed to depict Mohammed, then how the hell do they know what he looks like?I think it was just the fact that it was a cartoon. not that that excuses anything
Post by: Mamalakabubadaya on February 14, 2006, 03:16:00 pm
Post by: Spacey on February 14, 2006, 02:50:19 pm
Quote from: Wolfman
Another thing... if you\'re not allowed to depict Mohammed, then how the hell do they know what he looks like? How do they know the picture was of him? If I draw a picture of my friend Anil or even use a picture of Apu from The Simpsons and write "Mohammed" under it and post it on Muslim Websites, do you think I could start some riots?
Do this would cause some serious ****, some serious ****.
Post by: Wolfman on February 14, 2006, 02:41:53 pm
Post by: Spacey on February 14, 2006, 02:35:31 pm
The whole middle-east is a **** mess. Fighting battles that have been going on since at least 1187.
Post by: Wolfman on February 14, 2006, 02:31:51 pm
Quote from: YahooNews
LAHORE, Pakistan - Thousands of protesters rampaged through two cities Tuesday, storming into a diplomatic district and torching Western businesses and a provincial assembly in Pakistan\'s worst violence against the Prophet Muhammad drawings, officials said. At least two people were killed and 11 injured. Security forces fired into the air as they struggled to contain the unrest in the eastern city of Lahore, where protesters burned down four buildings housing a hotel, two banks, a KFC restaurant and the office of a Norwegian cell phone company, Telenor.
Someone get these people some video games, or the internet, or some pot, anything to keep them stagnant. It\'s probably just a bunch of dumb teenagers looking for a reason to riot. But without religion, they would have spent their day in school instead of doing this. Riots should happen when people are seriously oppressed, not over a cartoon. These cartoons came out 9 days ago. It\'s a stupid cartoon. Get over it losers.