Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Barbarity of Christianity (as compared to Islam)
nator
Member (Idle past 2200 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 166 of 299 (335329)
07-25-2006 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by randman
07-25-2006 4:54 PM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
quote:
Most of what you wrote was pure drivel, but exactly how is the religious right "oppressing" you or anyone?
My gay friends cannot get married, and therefore their children suffer, because of the Religious Right.
The Religious Right actively suppresses the teaching of science in public schools as much as it can.
The Religious Right has actively prevented the FDA from approving various birth control methods, such as emergency contraception.
The Religious Right has blocked scientific research.
The Religious Right is grabbing my tax dollars in the form of federal grants and school vouchers which they use, in part, to evangelize to people.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by randman, posted 07-25-2006 4:54 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by macaroniandcheese, posted 07-25-2006 11:37 PM nator has not replied
 Message 168 by randman, posted 07-26-2006 12:13 AM nator has replied

macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3958 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 167 of 299 (335332)
07-25-2006 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by nator
07-25-2006 10:07 PM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
exactly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by nator, posted 07-25-2006 10:07 PM nator has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 168 of 299 (335337)
07-26-2006 12:13 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by nator
07-25-2006 10:07 PM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
Your gay friends can get married, but marriage is by definition between a man and a woman. Why not support civil unions to give gays the benefits of marriage without redefining it?
The religious right supports real science education, not the passing on of fantasies and propaganda and calling it science.
Never heard of most of the religious right being against birth control. I think you are just wacked. There is opposition to RU-40 or whatever it is called for health reasons and the idea it kills after pregnancy.
Religious right has blocked some research on ethical grounds. So has the non-religious Left. Nearly everyone believes some medical research is unethical. I suspect even you do. You just choose to demonize those that disagree with you.
The Religious Right supports tax and spending cuts and so supports taking less of your tax dollars than what people like yourself wish to do.
The Religious Right does not oppress you or anyone. You cannot and have not shown any oppression at all from the Religious Right.
Edited by randman, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by nator, posted 07-25-2006 10:07 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by PaulK, posted 07-26-2006 2:45 AM randman has not replied
 Message 173 by nator, posted 07-26-2006 6:59 AM randman has replied
 Message 177 by ramoss, posted 07-27-2006 1:09 PM randman has not replied

RickJB
Member (Idle past 5020 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 169 of 299 (335341)
07-26-2006 12:32 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by randman
07-25-2006 4:56 PM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
Ah ha! So Christianity, as ever, is a special case. What a surprise!
Wahhabi Islam exists primarily in Saudi Arabia. However, the Muslim Brotherhood (a group which advocates an extreme political form of Islam), exists in all of those countries (except Iran of course).
I don't know what "pattern" you're looking at, but the one I see is one of poverty and political turmoil. Both are catalysts of extremist religion.
In any case, you have yet to demonstrate that all Muslims are extremists...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by randman, posted 07-25-2006 4:56 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by randman, posted 07-26-2006 12:36 AM RickJB has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 170 of 299 (335342)
07-26-2006 12:36 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by RickJB
07-26-2006 12:32 AM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
I have never claimed all Muslims are extremists. Why would you think that?
The issue though is a very large portion of Islam is extremist when viewed from the perspective of western values of individual liberty.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by RickJB, posted 07-26-2006 12:32 AM RickJB has not replied

PaulK
Member
Posts: 17828
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 171 of 299 (335355)
07-26-2006 2:45 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by randman
07-26-2006 12:13 AM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
quote:
Why not support civil unions to give gays the benefits of marriage without redefining it?
Much of the religious right is against that, too. Some of them are even against private companies granting the partners of gay employees health benefits.
quote:
The religious right supports real science education, not the passing on of fantasies and propaganda and calling it science.
That's been disproven in court. The religious right want to spread misinformation and religious indoctrination in science classes.
quote:
Never heard of most of the religious right being against birth control. I think you are just wacked. There is opposition to RU-40 or whatever it is called for health reasons and the idea it kills after pregnancy.
"Plan B" is a different drug from RU-486 and works in a different way. Why are the religious right against it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by randman, posted 07-26-2006 12:13 AM randman has not replied

ikabod
Member (Idle past 4523 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 172 of 299 (335364)
07-26-2006 3:52 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by randman
07-25-2006 5:17 PM


Re: wrong analysis
what many seem to be missing is that the "nations that contain nthese so called violrent islamist are areasof conflict even if you discount ant religion ..... the whole israel arab states conflict date back to the invasion of the jewish tribes taking others lands ... thus you end up with two populations both claiming the same land .. result conflict never mind adding religion in to the mix
iraq made up of a number of historically hostile factions kept in control by dictatorship and force
sudan and much of the horn of africa are colonical countries in which the imperial power played off the differing tribal fgactions to keep control .. most where areas of conflict before and have remained so after the colonial power has left .. result more conflict
the fact that islam is the religion of the areas simple means that islam becomes invoiled in the conflic=t and is used as a tool to control and direct the population by those in and or seeking power ....remember in many of these nation education is very poor ..just as in european medievil history .. it is the clerics that are educated and take major roles in power and nation building .
BTW as an example of how a religion can become tied up in a conflict even in the modern western world look at the past 100 years of irish history .. conflict where both sides claimed to be serving god .. with bombs and murder ..
if conflict exists the local religion is drawn in .....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by randman, posted 07-25-2006 5:17 PM randman has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2200 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 173 of 299 (335383)
07-26-2006 6:59 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by randman
07-26-2006 12:13 AM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
quote:
Your gay friends can get married, but marriage is by definition between a man and a woman. Why not support civil unions to give gays the benefits of marriage without redefining it?
1) The Religious Right has imposed it's will on everyone in the country by deciding for all of us what the definition of marriage is.
2) The Religious Right opposes domestic partner/civil unions for homosexuals too. Remember the RR boycott of Disney?
quote:
The religious right supports real science education, not the passing on of fantasies and propaganda and calling it science.
The courts have determined the opposite, repeatedly finding that their efforts to supporess science and/or teach their own version of science is, in fact, religious indoctrination and suppression of science. The Religious Right seeks to be the arbiter of what can and cannot be called science, based purely upon religious dogma.
quote:
Never heard of most of the religious right being against birth control. I think you are just wacked.
The Morning-After Pill and Plan B are forms of emergency contraception, and the RR opposes both.
quote:
There is opposition to RU-40 or whatever it is called for health reasons and the idea it kills after pregnancy.
Abortion is legal in this country, so blocking RU-486 because it may "kill after pregnancy" is oppression.
Those in the Religious Right have the power to block the release of this drug/procedure purely upon their own personal religious views.
quote:
Religious right has blocked some research on ethical grounds. So has the non-religious Left. Nearly everyone believes some medical research is unethical. I suspect even you do. You just choose to demonize those that disagree with you.
Of course I agree that some medical research, if conducted, would be unethical.
However, I also disagree with hypocritical ethics.
quote:
The Religious Right supports tax and spending cuts and so supports taking less of your tax dollars than what people like yourself wish to do.
Irrelevant to the point I made.
The Religious Right wants to, and has, taken my tax dollars and used them to indoctrinate people into their religion, and if they could, they would institute a school voucher system to take many more of my tax dollars and indoctrinate children into their religion.
That is Unamerican and oppressive..

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by randman, posted 07-26-2006 12:13 AM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by randman, posted 07-26-2006 5:05 PM nator has replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 174 of 299 (335530)
07-26-2006 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by nator
07-26-2006 6:59 AM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
So basically your argument is that Christianity is more barbaric than Islam because it does not accept homosexuality?
Is that it, shraf?
How about pedophiles? Are you a bigot because you don't accept pedophilia? It's a serious question. I don't think anyone just ups and chooses to become a pedophile without some serious sexual predispositions (genetic?) in that area.
I suspect basically your argument can be boiled down to you justifying your moral judgments but saying those that have a different morality than you are bigots, etc,...if they don't allow as totally moral, the behaviours you think are normal.
Bottom line for me is that I think civil unions are a perfectly acceptable compromise and that the push for gay marriage instead of civil unions exposes the political motivations of the people behind it. What they really want is a moral statement from the State denigrating traditional morality in these areas and sanctioning their moral views.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by nator, posted 07-26-2006 6:59 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 175 by RickJB, posted 07-27-2006 3:29 AM randman has not replied
 Message 176 by nator, posted 07-27-2006 6:22 AM randman has replied

RickJB
Member (Idle past 5020 days)
Posts: 917
From: London, UK
Joined: 04-14-2006


Message 175 of 299 (335631)
07-27-2006 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by randman
07-26-2006 5:05 PM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
randman writes:
...and that the push for gay marriage instead of civil unions....
Marriage IS a civil union. You seem to forget that the term is not limited any type of religion and no longer even to religion itself.
A gay civil union IS a gay marriage. It's up to the the individuals to decide if they want the union blessed by a church. There are some churches that are more than happy to bless such unions.
You talk as if your faith has some kind of monopoly on the term, when it is clear that it does not.
Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by randman, posted 07-26-2006 5:05 PM randman has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2200 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 176 of 299 (335645)
07-27-2006 6:22 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by randman
07-26-2006 5:05 PM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
quote:
So basically your argument is that Christianity is more barbaric than Islam because it does not accept homosexuality?
Is that it, shraf[sic]?
No.
My point was to show how Christianity, and in specific, the Radical Religious Right oppresses people, and I have shown that.
It uses my tax money to indoctrinate people into their religion.
It has presumed to decide for me and everyone else in the country what the definition of civil marriage is based upon their religious beliefs.
It seeks to decide for me and everyone else in the country what is and isn't science based upon their religious beliefs.
The RRR has blocked access to emergency contraception for no other reason than those in power to do so personally reject to it on religious grounds.
Now, the reason I bring up these examples is to show that the RRR does, indeed, oppress people if they can; if they are in the position to do so, even though you claimed that nobody was being oppressed by them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by randman, posted 07-26-2006 5:05 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by randman, posted 07-27-2006 1:16 PM nator has replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 642 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 177 of 299 (335740)
07-27-2006 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by randman
07-26-2006 12:13 AM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
Definitions change.
It used to be that marriage was between a man and his wives.
In some rare societies, it is between a woman and her husbands.
What is one more change?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by randman, posted 07-26-2006 12:13 AM randman has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 178 of 299 (335744)
07-27-2006 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by nator
07-27-2006 6:22 AM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
No, they don't oppress people. They have different political views from you. What is unAmerican is for you to demonize legitimate political differences as oppression. The truth is the Left is far more "oppressive" under those standards. They propose taking more money from people via higher taxes, and this includes the poor as well as the rich (gas taxes and FICA). They propose all sorts of safety laws oppressing people.....heck, they even "oppress" children by demanding they wear helmets when biking.
get the drift.....
The RR is not oppressing anyone. They believe outlawing abortion is, for example, saving a life. So the motive is saving a life, not oppression. You see it as oppression, but all it is really is a political and values difference. You just want to denigrate the values of those you disagree with, and really seek to do exactly what you criticize the other side of doing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by nator, posted 07-27-2006 6:22 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by Jazzns, posted 07-27-2006 1:28 PM randman has replied
 Message 188 by nator, posted 07-27-2006 5:57 PM randman has replied

Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3941 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 179 of 299 (335746)
07-27-2006 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by randman
07-27-2006 1:16 PM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
So the motive is saving a life, not oppression.
Why is it then that they historically don't give a damn about that life the moment it leaves the birth canal. The greatest hypocricy from the RR is being pro-life and at the same time against programs for women's and children's health.

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by randman, posted 07-27-2006 1:16 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by randman, posted 07-27-2006 1:37 PM Jazzns has not replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4929 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 180 of 299 (335752)
07-27-2006 1:37 PM
Reply to: Message 179 by Jazzns
07-27-2006 1:28 PM


Re: Is that an acceptable standard?
That's just crap. My experiences with the RR is that this group of people cares more about people, and children, and has made more sacrificial steps to alleviate suffering than any other group of people.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by Jazzns, posted 07-27-2006 1:28 PM Jazzns has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by ringo, posted 07-27-2006 2:27 PM randman has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024