• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Nearly 1 in 5 Americans Thinks Obama Is Muslim, Survey Shows

Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, it was the Catholic Church who PRESERVED books and learning during the Dark Ages while the Vikings, Magyars, and Arabs were running rampant through a divided and weakened Europe.

It was the monasteries that were the educational hotbeds of the time. The monks were the only educated ones during this time. The monks, kept, and translated alot of knowledge from antiquity, and were the main historians during the Dark Ages. But the Catholic Church did persecute anyone who disagreed with them, and it wasn't uncommon when a country with a Catholic king conquered an area that it would force people(especially the pagans) to convert to Christianity under the penalty of death.
 
Last edited:
It was the monasteries that were the educational hotbeds of the time. The monks were the only educated ones during this time. The monks, kept, and translated alot of knowledge from antiquity, and were the main historians during the Dark Ages. But the Catholic Church did persecute anyone who disagreed with them, and it wasn't uncommon when a country with a Catholic king conquered an area that it would force people(especially the pagans) to convert to Christianity under the penalty of death.

But the Dark Ages weren't caused by the Church. The Church was a stabilizing force in Europe. If a king forced people to convert, it wasn't the Church doing it. In fact, as far back as the end of the 5th century, popes clearly stated that there were two realms -- political and spiritual and that the two should remain separate. The Church had little control over the actions of kings from the fall of Rome through the next five centuries...
 
Is it just me, or has this thread strayed so far from its original premise that it is nearly unrecognizable as to what we should be discussing. :doh

Look, I don't think that Obama is a practicing Muslim. He is a follower of Black Liberation Theology. Which BTW libs, doesn't make him a Christian like he claims either. :cool:

He is sympathetic to Islam in the sense that he is coward by them, and that coupled with his world view that America is ignoble in the world fits in with his weak approach to what Islam wants to do with America.

In the end, Obama is a danger to the world as long as he fails to realize that Americas power is the only, last, best stop to the modern caliphate that Islam is currently engaged in. As long as his world view of American decline is realized, the West loses.


j-mac
 
But the Dark Ages weren't caused by the Church. The Church was a stabilizing force in Europe. If a king forced people to convert, it wasn't the Church doing it. In fact, as far back as the end of the 5th century, popes clearly stated that there were two realms -- political and spiritual and that the two should remain separate. The Church had little control over the actions of kings from the fall of Rome through the next five centuries...

The Dark Ages started because Western Rome fell, which is a reason for it being "dark". Also the plague was a huge factor, the church certainly did help with it being "dark", because they oppressed any opposing view point. Also to say that Popes didn't have any say in what Kings did is false. Popes had tremendous power, and could force kings to do things under the threat of excommunication. The Church, and politics were one in the same. There were many factors that made the dark ages "dark", it wasn't just one thing.
 
The Dark Ages started because Western Rome fell, which is a reason for it being "dark". Also the plague was a huge factor, the church certainly did help with it being "dark", because they oppressed any opposing view point. Also to say that Popes didn't have any say in what Kings did is false. Popes had tremendous power, and could force kings to do things under the threat of excommunication. The Church, and politics were one in the same. There were many factors that made the dark ages "dark", it wasn't just one thing.

Is Islam intertwined with politics in the countries it is practiced today?


j-mac
 
Is Islam intertwined with politics in the countries it is practiced today?


j-mac

Is Christianity intertwined with right wing politics in your country that it is practised in today?

Jet-Pack

hqdefault.jpg
 
Is Islam intertwined with politics in the countries it is practiced today?


j-mac

In alot of middle eastern countries yes. In most countries in the west, no.
 
In alot of middle eastern countries yes. In most countries in the west, no.

Then I can only be dumbfounded by your apparent defense of Islam through the negativity of discussion concerning Christianity. See, if mixing Christian dogma in the politics of the day back in centuries long gone, then how exactly can you watch, and in fact defend a society that does that very thing today in Islam?

In fact, wouldn't you say that the precept of the current modern caliphate against the western culture is in the hopes that Islam can convert the west not only to Islam, but force Shria law on it as well?


j-mac
 
Is Christianity intertwined with right wing politics in your country that it is practised in today?

Not in the way that Islam is a politireligious movement. Do we have Bishops in governor seats? Cardinals in congress? No. But nice try in bashing the west in a totally partisan way.


j-mac
 
Not in the way that Islam is a politireligious movement. Do we have Bishops in governor seats? Cardinals in congress? No. But nice try in bashing the west in a totally partisan way.


j-mac

Soutern Baptist Minister, Mike Huckabee.......44th Governor of Arkansas
 
Not in the way that Islam is a politireligious movement. Do we have Bishops in governor seats? Cardinals in congress? No. But nice try in bashing the west in a totally partisan way.


j-mac

Only ONE country on this planet is run as an Islamic Republic, ONE. Iran.

Most leaders in the ME subscribe to Islamic styles as a matter of culture, but they do not want people like the Ayatollah in charge.

What I meant J-Mac, was is policy effected by religion, especially in Right Wing Politics. It is true, there's quite a few Republican policies that are effected by religion, to think otherwise is Niave.
 
The Dark Ages started because Western Rome fell, which is a reason for it being "dark". Also the plague was a huge factor, the church certainly did help with it being "dark", because they oppressed any opposing view point. Also to say that Popes didn't have any say in what Kings did is false. Popes had tremendous power, and could force kings to do things under the threat of excommunication. The Church, and politics were one in the same. There were many factors that made the dark ages "dark", it wasn't just one thing.

The Plague occurred centuries after the end of the Dark Age. The Church didn't have such tremendous power until after the Dark Ages ended and the formation of strong centralized stated started.
 
Soutern Baptist Minister, Mike Huckabee.......44th Governor of Arkansas

Chosen by the people in a free election in which there were people who were not ministers. Are you trying to say that people who are ministers and pastors don't have political rights?
 
Then I can only be dumbfounded by your apparent defense of Islam through the negativity of discussion concerning Christianity. See, if mixing Christian dogma in the politics of the day back in centuries long gone, then how exactly can you watch, and in fact defend a society that does that very thing today in Islam?

In fact, wouldn't you say that the precept of the current modern caliphate against the western culture is in the hopes that Islam can convert the west not only to Islam, but force Shria law on it as well?


j-mac

First off, I'm not attacking Christianity, it's just what happened. Stating facts is not attacking. Secondly, I'm not defending Islam. Do some muslims want to implement Sharia Law world wide, yes. Do most muslims want to, no. And the theocracy's in the middle east are bad, but we can't do anything about them unless they pose a significant threat to us. And even then we can't control their government after any such conflict. IMO, we dealt with the whole "war on terror" in the wrong way. Invading countries, and nation building was not the way to go. But thats another topic. Who I do defend though, is Muslim Americans, who aren't anything like the extremist in the middle east, and are generally good Americans.
 
Chosen by the people in a free election in which there were people who were not ministers. Are you trying to say that people who are ministers and pastors don't have political rights?

Nope, just pointing out that politics and religion are intertwined in the US.
 
The Plague occurred centuries after the end of the Dark Age. The Church didn't have such tremendous power until after the Dark Ages ended and the formation of strong centralized stated started.

I was referring to the Plague of Justinian(I probably should of been more specific), which was a major event that was a factor into the Dark Ages. Now the Church didn't have as much power as in the higher middle ages, but it did have power, and excommunication was a huge threat to anyone in power.
 
I was referring to the Plague of Justinian(I probably should of been more specific), which was a major event that was a factor into the Dark Ages. Now the Church didn't have as much power as in the higher middle ages, but it did have power, and excommunication was a huge threat to anyone in power.

In Constantinople... While what was happening in Constantinople affected what was going on in southeastern Europe and southern Italy in the 6th century, the rest of Europe had already pretty much sunk into the Dark Age and the city didn't have all that much influence on events there. Also, there was already the beginnings of the origins of a rift between Constantinople and Rome developing at the time.
 
First off, I'm not attacking Christianity, it's just what happened. Stating facts is not attacking.


It is good that you would like to remember history, however, we are in the here and now, and I just think that using centuries old history in order to say that what is going on today is justified in any way is just somehow not very genuine. I mean, sure we can certainly agree that Christianity had its dark moments, so has Islam in the past. But what we are facing is happening right now, not in some academic debate with no consequence.

The opening article, and question surrounding that article is about the 20+ percent of Americans that are now thinking Obama is a Muslim, and somehow we are off the rails into how Christians in the dark ages melded religion and government? What is that?


Secondly, I'm not defending Islam.


Kinda...In a way you are.

Do some muslims want to implement Sharia Law world wide, yes. Do most muslims want to, no.

That is debatable. Do you know 'most Muslims' personally?


And the theocracy's in the middle east are bad, but we can't do anything about them unless they pose a significant threat to us.


What? have you been reading the headlines recently? They do.

And even then we can't control their government after any such conflict.

Who said anything about control? That is a paradigm that liberals seem to always want to apply. Open, and honest democracies where the people have freedom seldom need any outside control.


IMO, we dealt with the whole "war on terror" in the wrong way. Invading countries, and nation building was not the way to go. But thats another topic.

You just went 48 pages on the dark ages, having NOTHING to do with the original OP, and now you make a hit and run statement like this, and this can't be discussed here? :lamo Yeah, ok point me to your thread on this one please.

Who I do defend though, is Muslim Americans, who aren't anything like the extremist in the middle east, and are generally good Americans.

No doubt that we have a great many Muslim Americans that are far removed from the fanaticism of the radical movements now aimed at the western societies. However, there are a share of radicals right here as well. See Red House VA. or any of the 1 in 10 mosques now under surveillance by the FBI today.


j-mac
 
In Constantinople... While what was happening in Constantinople affected what was going on in southeastern Europe and southern Italy in the 6th century, the rest of Europe had already pretty much sunk into the Dark Age and the city didn't have all that much influence on events there. Also, there was already the beginnings of the origins of a rift between Constantinople and Rome developing at the time.

The Plague of Justinian weakened the Byzantine empire at the critical point when Justinian's armies had nearly wholly invested Italy and could have credibly reformed a Western Roman Empire, which could of considerably weakened the effect of the Dark Ages.
 
The Plague of Justinian weakened the Byzantine empire at the critical point when Justinian's armies had nearly wholly invested Italy and could have credibly reformed a Western Roman Empire, which could of considerably weakened the effect of the Dark Ages.

Modern historians are not even using the term any longer, because new information shows it wasn't really dark.
 
It is good that you would like to remember history, however, we are in the here and now, and I just think that using centuries old history in order to say that what is going on today is justified in any way is just somehow not very genuine. I mean, sure we can certainly agree that Christianity had its dark moments, so has Islam in the past. But what we are facing is happening right now, not in some academic debate with no consequence.

The opening article, and question surrounding that article is about the 20+ percent of Americans that are now thinking Obama is a Muslim, and somehow we are off the rails into how Christians in the dark ages melded religion and government? What is that?
I'm not justifying it, I hate religion of any kind in politics. And I didn't start the convo about the Dark Ages. Also, if we can't parallel our history to current situations, then we will never learn from it.





Kinda...In a way you are.

How?

That is debatable. Do you know 'most Muslims' personally?

Do you? Most muslims aren't "waging Jihad against the west".



What? have you been reading the headlines recently? They do.

What specific country attacked us? A terrorist organization attacked us.

Who said anything about control? That is a paradigm that liberals seem to always want to apply. Open, and honest democracies where the people have freedom seldom need any outside control.

Do you know how hard it is to keep a new democratic government stable?


You just went 48 pages on the dark ages, having NOTHING to do with the original OP, and now you make a hit and run statement like this, and this can't be discussed here? :lamo Yeah, ok point me to your thread on this one please.

We can discuss it, but I didn't want to derail the thread even more. We should of bombed the living hell out of Afghanistan, to show the world if you mess with us you get the horns. Instead of wide-scale invasion of Iraq, and Afghanistan, we should of hunted down each terrorist organization, and cell, with special forces. It would of saved alot of American lives, and a big chunk of the debt we have now.

No doubt that we have a great many Muslim Americans that are far removed from the fanaticism of the radical movements now aimed at the western societies. However, there are a share of radicals right here as well. See Red House VA. or any of the 1 in 10 mosques now under surveillance by the FBI today.


j-mac

Yeah, there is a radical minority( and it is played up by the media), but they won't change anything. Any law based on religion will get shot down.
 
I'm not justifying it, I hate religion of any kind in politics. And I didn't start the convo about the Dark Ages. Also, if we can't parallel our history to current situations, then we will never learn from it.

Apples to apples would be a refreshing change today. Can you point to any parallel in today's application of Christianity toward Government, as compared to the theocracies we see in Islam?



By digging back to a pre modern era to say that Christians did it too, is justification of sorts in my mind.


Do you? Most muslims aren't "waging Jihad against the west".

Many experts on the subject say that upwards of 10% of the 1.2 Billion Muslims adhere to a radicalized form of Islam, and sentiment toward Western culture. If true, are you really trying to dismiss 1.2 Million?

Do you know how hard it is to keep a new democratic government stable?

So it's not worth it?


We can discuss it, but I didn't want to derail the thread even more.

So start a thread in the proper forum and I'd be more than happy to discuss it. But as you noted it derails the thread at present we are in, just as a tangent about 7th century Christianity derails this thread of how 1 in 5 Americans see Obama as Muslim.

Yeah, there is a radical minority( and it is played up by the media), but they won't change anything. Any law based on religion will get shot down.

So they should just be ignored? That is a dangerous course you would place on this country.


j-mac
 
Apples to apples would be a refreshing change today. Can you point to any parallel in today's application of Christianity toward Government, as compared to the theocracies we see in Islam?

I don't know of any Christian theocracy's today, except maybe the Vatican. The parallel isn't exclusive to Christianity, it's for all religions, and that using religion in government is a bad thing. No matter what religion.

By digging back to a pre modern era to say that Christians did it too, is justification of sorts in my mind.

It's not a justification, it's just an example of how Islam isn't special, and it's not the only religion that was/is used to control governments.



Many experts on the subject say that upwards of 10% of the 1.2 Billion Muslims adhere to a radicalized form of Islam, and sentiment toward Western culture. If true, are you really trying to dismiss 1.2 Million?

We shouldn't ignore them, but we shouldn't have this fear of Islam that some people have.


So it's not worth it?

For American, I don't think so. Why should we have to police the world?


So they should just be ignored? That is a dangerous course you would place on this country.


j-mac

They shouldn't be ignored, but there not a threat to our freedoms that some people would make them out to be. Our Constitution protects us from anyone who wants to put any religion into our laws.
 
Is Christianity intertwined with right wing politics in your country that it is practised in today?

Jet-Pack

hqdefault.jpg

Actually, I'd say no. Right wingers may try to influence, but they can't do anything directly. We still have legalized abortion, which the right wingers would have never allowed it in it's present form. Some Muslim countries still cut limbs off for various theft crimes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom