• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The mass exodus of Christians from the Muslim world

If you don't agree with me, then obviously you must have an alternative reason for why he dishonestly compared Christianity to the violence of Islam in the Middle East... Care to share it, or are you just disagreeing with me based on ideology?

Ummm,I don't speak for anyone else on this forum but myself.Unlike a lot of people on this forum,I don't pretend to know what goes on in peoples minds.

Personally,I couldn't care less what Paschendale loves or hates.Whether he loves me or hates me personally,that is none of my concern,unless Paschendale acts upon that hate or love.
Then it becomes my concern.
Personally I think Paschendale had no right to use the word "we".
If he doesn't want Christians around him,that may make him an a-hole,but that doesn't necessarily mean he HATES Christians.
While groups of Christians aren't going around killing people,there are groups of Christians trying to legislate their morals,their, beliefs,and their religion in THIS country.
It is of course,their right to do so,but I'm not required to admire them,love them,or even respect them themselves for doing so.
I asked you, "is there an Amendment in the Constitution dictating that we Americans are required to love a religion and the religious?"
No religions hands are free of blood on this planet.
In my opinion this thread is a "lets everyone to hate the muslims" sing-along and I already stated that I refuse to join in on the choir.

If Paschendale hates Christians,that's his problem,not mine. It's not my place to tell him he can't.

Ray410 brought a totally irrelevant subject into this thread based on his apparent hatred of homosexuals.
I called him on it,why didn't you?If you are going to call people on hate,Grim17 at least be consistent and equal about it.

I'm not required to agree with anyone on anything if I don't want to.Nor am I required to explain why.
Unless of course,I can make a few bucks off that information.While I know there is a rule against placing wagers on DP.com,does anyone know if there is a rule against the selling information?
I'm a business man.
Is that answer sufficient enough for you?
 
So you are asking me to solve a problem that hasn't been solved in... 1400 years? Well, no pressure, I guess....
Take your time,I'm in no rush.
I realize that's a problem that's been around since the dawn of man,not just 1400 years.
People have always killed one another over religion.
Christianity itself isn't exactly pure in the "killing non-believers" department.
Not saying that christians are going around killing people,but there are a number of Christians engaged in some very objectionable activities in this country.
Westboro Baptist Church comes to mind.
Now I am not saying that every Christian is like the WBC,but what I am saying is that maybe Christianity should clean up it's own house before they attempt to clean up someone else's.

I do know that ignoring it doesn't seem to work, so we can scratch that from the list of possible solutions.
I fully agree.
It's some of the solutions that are still on that list that worries me.
 
Last edited:
Christians account for 90 percent of the charity and humanitarian efforts on theplanet, yet atheists insist on equating them to radical Muslims. Please show me the worldwide charitable outreach efforts from Islamists.

And before you go the "small percentage of disenfranchised" route, the Boston bombers had a pretty good life here,.and and killed eight-year-olds with a bomb for Allah anyway.

We equate RADICAL Christians to RADICAL Muslims.
 
We equate RADICAL Christians to RADICAL Muslims.

But how many more of them, and how much more violently dangerous, are the latter to the former?

It's a patently stupid comparison.
 
It should always be noted at the outset of these discussions that a "Radical, Bigot, Hater, Homophobe, Racist, Xenophobe, Extremist" is defined as ANYONE WHO DISAGREES with the Homosexual/Liberal agenda.
 
Last edited:
Never, but I have recieved metaphysical threats on many occasions. I.e. go to hell, you're going to burn etc.

I don't quite understand what your answer means?
 
If he doesn't want Christians around him,that may make him an a-hole,but that doesn't necessarily mean he HATES Christians.

My observation was that he was equating Christians with Muslims in the Middle East when it comes to violence. That is dishonest and the basis for my opinion that he must harbor a lot of contempt for Christians to resort to such dishonesty. It had nothing to do with whether or not he wanted Christians around him.


While groups of Christians aren't going around killing people,

That is exactly my point... They are not going around killing people, while Muslims in the ME are engaged in the killing of Christians.


there are groups of Christians trying to legislate their morals,their, beliefs,and their religion in THIS country.
It is of course,their right to do so,but I'm not required to admire them,love them,or even respect them themselves for doing so.

I agree totally, but do you believe that justifies falsely painting Christians as violent and engaging in the religious cleansing that Muslims are involved in?

In my book, the answer is a resounding "no".

I
asked you, "is there an Amendment in the Constitution dictating that we Americans are required to love a religion and the religious?"
No religions hands are free of blood on this planet.
In my opinion this thread is a "lets everyone to hate the muslims" sing-along and I already stated that I refuse to join in on the choir.


That's your right to do so, but it does not change the facts, nor does it give anyone else the right to change those facts.


Ray410 brought a totally irrelevant subject into this thread based on his apparent hatred of homosexuals.
I called him on it,why didn't you?If you are going to call people on hate,Grim17 at least be consistent and equal about it.

I just looked at it, and I see critisism of homosexuals, but not nessisarily hatred. It seems his distain is more toward liberalism in general than anything else. I could be wrong though.

The difference between his post and the one I commented on, is Ray expressed an opinion about how people "feel" which can't be proven either way, while Paschendale's comparisan is about actual violence that is committed, which is easily shown to be false.


Is that answer sufficient enough for you?

I suppose it will have to do.
 
We equate RADICAL Christians to RADICAL Muslims.

What is this "we" you are speaking about?
I sure as hell don't.

But just because RADICAL Christians haven't been going around killing anyone (as of late) doesn't mean they get a free pass to do whatever they want to do without legal consequences or legal repercussions.
 
Well the KKK springs to mind pretty quickly. But I'm sure you'll tell me that they're just a political group and the burning crosses, religious iconography and mantra to kill non-Christians (specifically non-Protestants) is just a coincidence. Likewise, the neo-Nazi movement is heavily rooted in Christianity and preaches the murder of non-Christians.

What does this have to do with not wanting to be caught up in someone else's crazy religious wars? The OP is practically salivating at the prospect of Christianity and Islam having it out with no regard that the rest of us live on this planet too and don't want anyone blowing it up over their nonsense.

Why are you muddying up the thread spouting apologist lines? This thread isn't about US-based groups of Christian supremacists. It's about war. I don't want to be caught up in a religious war between people over their primitive beliefs. And the eagerness that some people have for such a war scares me. Especially the ones who actually believe that their religion compels them towards such a war and they look forward to the end of the world. That's terrifying.



The United States is a secular country. Radicals of any religion are marginalized and kept from obtaining power. Though radical Christians are afforded a lot more power that they don't deserve than any other radical religious groups. A radical Christian country would be one like Congo or Zambia.

I far prefer modern secular countries.

So what you are saying is that Radical Christians do exist in America? And that they are marginalized. I don't see then blowing up abortion clinics every day.
 
I know the first post is a bit grim and over dramatic (in some cases) but come on people I know it may seem like another world to you but the violence is real a lot of the time it's sectarian violence, in places like Nigeria it's Christians and Muslims battling it out causing death and destruction on both sides but if there are Christians who have to flee their homes to escape violence in pre-dominantly Muslim countries due to a strong presence from radicalized Islam then isn't it something worth discussing?

I thought so. I expressed a general fear and disdain for religious conflict, especially the wide scale holy war that the OP talks about, but I'm apparently a terrible liar because I won't blame it entirely on the Muslims.

Bull****! You have no ****ing idea what he feels about Christianity. Besides its against the rules t comment about another poster here at DP.
.

I'll say exactly how I feel about Christianity. I don't like religion. Any religion. I don't like people making decisions based on who is a member of which arbitrary group. I don't like the violence that religions, especially Abrahamic ones, tend to incorporate so readily. I don't like it about Judiasm (the religion of my youth), I don't like it about Christianity, and I don't like it about Islam.

Since they derive from the exact same tenets and worship the exact same god, I don't tend to differentiate much between them. The differences are really quite superficial. I don't excuse one or the other for any reason. They also look awfully similar when one sees that fundamentalists of all three religions preach the same bigotry and hatred, especially of women and gays. They all denounce science and demand political power for their priesthood, who claim to speak for a probably nonexistent god who wants those specific people in power.

All three are false, and completely and utterly evil. I take a lot of exception when a member of one religion or the other tries to paint the others as worse. They're not worse. They're all bad. Equally bad. Some are in a better position to do evil at the moment, but at various times, each one has abused power that it had and persecuted, tortured, and killed.

This entire discussion came when I said that I, as a non-believer with no allegiance to Christianity or Islam, would like them to take their disputes far away from me and leave me out of them. Then Christians had to proclaim that their religion was not to blame for this conflict, but only Islam is. I'm sure that Medusa, for example, would disagree and blame Christianity and not Islam. The truth is that they're both to blame. They've been trying to wipe each other out for more than a thousand years. The rest of us are really tired of it.

Not really. But I don't necessarily agree with Paschendale either. I will say that Paschendale should have used the pronoun "I" instead of "We".
I can speak for damn self.

Apologies. I am really tired of it. I don't presume to speak for anyone but myself, but I do feel that my positions on this subject align with many others. I do not mean to put words into anyone's mouth.

Maybe it's time for some of us Christians to take up the challenge and show these middle aged barbarians what we can do and give them a real jihad.

This right here is an example of what my original point was about. There's been a lot of rumbling in this country about a religious war between Islam and Christianity for more than a decade. Bush was a proponent of it. A lot of military groups were proponents of it. They inscribed bible verses on weapons to fight in Iraq. Jihaddist Christians are no different from and just as much a threat to the civilized world as Jihaddist Muslims. Possibly moreso because they have the wealth and power of the United States behind them. Or at least they will if the secular majority of this country isn't careful.

OK Pete... Then you explain why he would resort to dishonesty to slander Christians.

Grim's comments are all accusing me of lying, and declaring that I have some kind of unreasoned hatred of Christianity and want to pretend it's something that it's not. Sorry Grim, I'm telling the truth. It's a truth that you don't like. Radical Christian groups in this country, like the KKK and neo-Nazis that Jmotivator wants to pretend aren't really Christian, employ violence all the time to kill those of different religions. Mainstream Christians use their power to keep fundamental rights away from gays and women. I've personally seen Jews do it as well, and I'm sure Muslims in this country do as well.

Most of the southern half of Africa is dominated by Christian countries that inflict just as much violence as Islamic Middle Eastern nations. They mutilate and rape women and girls for daring to be equal. They fight against science and learning. They butcher children because they believe god wants them to. The facts are clear. None of these three religions are innocent. It's not slander if it's true. That you are in denial of the truth does not make me dishonest.

As to my "hate"... I'm not sure. I hate violence. I hate bigotry. I hate the applauding of ignorance and the condemnation of learning. Maybe I even hate the people who do those sorts of things. I've never met a member of the KKK, but I might very well hate him if I did. I tend to find those qualities a lot more in the religious (Jew, Christian, and Muslim) than in the non-religious. I don't know exactly if that qualifies as hate. I think the fact that despite my arguments against religion, I still wouldn't try to take away the liberty to be religious means it's not hate. Maybe that's just my definition. I might say that I hate a few specific Christians for acts they have personally performed against me, silencing and discriminated against me for their religion. And some Jews, too. No Muslims have done anything like that to me personally, though I might say that I hate Al Qaeda and the terrorists who attack my country. But that's hating individuals for their actions. I tend to think that it's okay to hate people who do bad things for the bad things they've done. None of this changes the facts of what people do in the name of their religion.

And none of this changes my stance about holy wars. A holy war, like the one the OP and DVSentinal are salivating over, would be the most awful thing that could possibly happen. The United States and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, and I do not want them flinging those weapons at each other in order to prove whose religion has a bigger penis.
 
My observation was that he was equating Christians with Muslims in the Middle East when it comes to violence. That is dishonest and the basis for my opinion that he must harbor a lot of contempt for Christians to resort to such dishonesty. It had nothing to do with whether or not he wanted Christians around him.
Thank you for using the words, my observation" AND "for my opinion".
SINCE YOU CLARIFIED THAT,I agree then,that Paschendale was wrong for doing that.
That is exactly my point... They are not going around killing people, while Muslims in the ME are engaged in the killing of Christians.
Anyone killing anyone on the basis of religion (or really for whatever reason other than self defense or the defense of others lives) is just plan wrong.
Just because Radical Christians aren't going around killing people,doesn't mean that we aren't allowed to criticize (and if it is illegal,incarcerate) the screwed up things they do.
Christianity has it's own bloody nasty history,and sometimes Christians need to be reminded of that before they go off and repeat it again themselves.

I agree totally, but do you believe that justifies falsely painting Christians as violent and engaging in the religious cleansing that Muslims are involved in?
In my book, the answer is a resounding "no".

I don't believe in painting with a broad brush at all and I don't believe it justifies anything.

I hope next time you see someone here on DP.com falsely paint Homosexuals with the same paintbrush used to paint pedophiles and sheepscrewers,I hope you come out and condemn them for that also,because that happens quite a lot here.
Because my daughter is gay,and I really hate it when people lump her in with those criminals and nutjobs.
Like I said,if you are going to point people out on their generalities and hatreds,at least be fair and consistent about it.
That's your right to do so, but it does not change the facts, nor does it give anyone else the right to change those facts. [.quote]
Have I denied that Islamist terrorism is not a huge problem?
I've been asking what can we do about it.

I just looked at it, and I see critisism of homosexuals, but not nessisarily hatred. It seems his distain is more toward liberalism in general than anything else. I could be wrong though.

The difference between his post and the one I commented on, is Ray expressed an opinion about how people "feel" which can't be proven either way, while Paschendale's comparisan is about actual violence that is committed, which is easily shown to be false.
We see things differently,and that's cool.
Though I can't help but notice you both have the same political "lean".
Are you a christian also
That's isn't effecting how you see things,now is it?
Your not afraid of criticizing your fellow conservative or christian if they do something objectionable are you?

Homosexuality had nothing to do with this thread until he brought it up.
And it still doesn't have anything to do with this thread after he brought it up.
That wasn't an attempt to "muddy the well",it was an outright attempt to poison it.
At least in my opinion.

What the hell does the beliefs of homosexuals have anything to do with this thread?
I already asked him and he hasn't answered yet.








I just looked at it, and I see critisism of homosexuals, but not nessisarily hatred. It seems his distain is more toward liberalism in general than anything else. I could be wrong though.

The difference between his post and the one I commented on, is Ray expressed an opinion about how people "feel" which can't be proven either way, while Paschendale's comparisan is about actual violence that is committed, which is easily shown to be false.




I suppose it will have to do.[/QUOTE]
 
Never, but I have recieved metaphysical threats on many occasions. I.e. go to hell, you're going to burn etc.

Noun: metaphysics ,me-tu'fi-ziks
The philosophical study of being and knowing

Type of: philosophy

Encyclopedia: Metaphysics

Are you saying that a Christian threatening you with a possible future in hell affects you being and knowing? How long after this threat is it before you are able to have self-awareness and function as a normal person again?
 
Radical Islamism is indeed a problem, so is persecution of religious minorities in Muslim countries.

What shall we do about it? I guess there is not much we can do, except what we're doing already (fighting terrorists, supporting less extreme governments in the Muslim world, education, etc). We don't have the resources to save the world and make everybody see the light.

On the plus side, I think there is light on the horizon, suggesting this latest trend towards radical islamism is just the final uproar, a mere rearguard action by anti-modernist Muslims against a modernizing world. Much is changing in many Muslim countries already: In many of them, a middle class is forming, an educated youth and especially educated women. You especially see that in countries such as Iran, Egypt or Indonesia. Albeit still a minority, these better educated young people affected by modernization (modern infomation technology, increasingly self-aware young women with education) are challenging the old traditions (and the reactionary answers to their modernity by islamists) already and won't be willing to allow a backwards mentality to keep their nations back. You saw first effects of these social shifts already, in the "Green Revolution" in Iran and the "Arab Spring" (although democratization was not persistant, but for the time being strengthened islamists).

So I'd say the recent trend towards islamism, a "back to the roots of Islam"-view, is a sign that reality is changing and modernizing in these countries, ironically. There was no need to "go back to the roots", if there was no modernity disturbing you. Give it 2 or 3 generations and time will do the trick.

Oh, and as for the article in the OP: I think it's misleading that the author would even blame "white" European Muslim countries, especially Bosnia. The fact that many Christians are leaving Bosnia, if true, has probably more to do with the general ethnic realignment in former Yugoslavia, than with a radicalization of Muslims. Catholics there are Croatian and are likely leaving the predominantly Muslim-Bosnian regions for Croatia, just like the Orthodox Serbians are leaving for Serbia. Besides, there is not even a Muslim majority in Bosnia (only 45% of the inhabitants are Muslim, while 52% are Christian)... and the Muslim Bosnians form a territorial alliance with the Catholic Bosnian Croatians.
 
This is just phase 3 of the destruction of the West---------The annihilation of the oldest Christian communities in the world....................
 
This right here is an example of what my original point was about. There's been a lot of rumbling in this country about a religious war between Islam and Christianity for more than a decade. Bush was a proponent of it. A lot of military groups were proponents of it. They inscribed bible verses on weapons to fight in Iraq. Jihaddist Christians are no different from and just as much a threat to the civilized world as Jihaddist Muslims. Possibly moreso because they have the wealth and power of the United States behind them. Or at least they will if the secular majority of this country isn't careful.

And none of this changes my stance about holy wars. A holy war, like the one the OP and DVSentinal are salivating over, would be the most awful thing that could possibly happen. The United States and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, and I do not want them flinging those weapons at each other in order to prove whose religion has a bigger penis.

I don't salivate over wars, but I don't fear them either. You might want to consider who started the war. If they want one, then fine, lets teach them the true meaning of war, but don't blame the persons who are defending against the aggression for starting or even wanting a war.
 
If Christians and Muslims want to kill each other so badly, can they at least show some courtesy and leave the rest of us out of it?

Of course not. Radicalized extremists of both camps envision a world dominated by their religion, and anyone who isn't with them is against them. They're mentally unstable, and don't care who they harm in their idiotic quests.
 
Are you a christian also

No, I'm not.

That's isn't effecting how you see things,now is it?

No, it isn't.

Your not afraid of criticizing your fellow conservative or christian if they do something objectionable are you?

I'm not affraid of critisizing anyone. Wrong is wrong, and the truth is the truth.

Homosexuality had nothing to do with this thread until he brought it up.
And it still doesn't have anything to do with this thread after he brought it up.
That wasn't an attempt to "muddy the well",it was an outright attempt to poison it.
At least in my opinion.

I agree that it had nothing to do with the topic at hand, and I have very little tollerance for people who attempt to derail topics because the one at hand doesn't suit them politically.

What the hell does the beliefs of homosexuals have anything to do with this thread?
I already asked him and he hasn't answered yet.

Like I stated, I think he was going after the left in general. I think he just used the homosexual thing to make a political point.
 
Would an Islamic society be inherently violent if liberalism took hold, as it has in the West?
 
No, I'm not.



No, it isn't.



I'm not affraid of critisizing anyone. Wrong is wrong, and the truth is the truth.



I agree that it had nothing to do with the topic at hand, and I have very little tollerance for people who attempt to derail topics because the one at hand doesn't suit them politically.



Like I stated, I think he was going after the left in general. I think he just used the homosexual thing to make a political point.

What political point was he trying to make?
That homosexuals (and liberals) are worse than muslems?
.

Lets look at his very first line of his post,shall we?
One can never neutralize the hatred of the homosexuals for Christianity, their hate is worse than the Muslims.

That's an industrial size brush he used to paint homosexuals as hating Christianity in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuals.
Do you agree with him on this?
Is it alright to paint homesexuals in a negative light,but wrong to do it to christians?
Remember what I said to you about being consistent.
Lets see the rest of his post,shall we?

That is the attraction of the big Liberal circus tent of diversity, it is based on hatred of a common enemy so that those groups who would normally hate each other join together in their hatred of a common enemy.
What the hell is he talking about?
Who is this "common enemy he is talking about.
Sounds like he's saying that homosexuals and muslIms are conspiring with each other to wage war on Christianity.
Do you agree with him on this?

This thread is a great example of that unnatural bond that brings votes for the Dems.

In many countries, the Muslims want to kill the homosexuals, but, as we see here, all that is forgiven by the homosexuals who embrace the Muslim hatred of Christians and therefore defend the Muslims.

Just what political point is he trying to make here?It doesn't make a lick of sense.
Do you understand it?Can you explain it to me?
And do you agree with it?

Homosexuals have nothing to do with this thread.Zero,zilch,nada,bumpkiss,NOTHING!!!!
I call bullcrap on your explanation that he was only going after the left in general.
I think his primary target were homosexuals.

But hey,why doesn't he just clarify his own statement?
But doing that isn't his usual modus operandi.

I said Paschendale was wrong for using the word "WE" and agreed with you that he was wrong for using a broad paintbrush on the Christians.
You argued with me about that for a number of posts.
Pashendale even apologized for using the "WE".
So,does Ray get to have a free pass from you just because he's a conservative?

What is your opinions on Ray410's post?Do you agree or disagree with what he wrote?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom