• 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!

Is Islam a "Religion of Peace"?

Is Islam a "Religion of Peace"?

  • Yes

    Votes: 15 11.4%

  • No

    Votes: 73 55.3%

  • Yes and no

    Votes: 28 21.2%

  • Something else

    Votes: 16 12.1%
  • Total voters
    132
le bouffon said:
In a society of laws, not of man, this cannot happen. It must only happen by force. I'd opt for people to be religious and take the chance of extremism to happen, than to ban all religions forcibly to prevent extremism from happening.
Click to expand...

Force is out of the question cause it works against removing religion. The religious use the oppression to strive against "Tyranny" and eventually win like they did with Rome. Even China cannot remove religions (minor religions at that) by force.

But "How?" is still a good question.
 
DDD said:
Links please? Got to see this ;)

Saw it above



What uncomfortable conclusions would they be?



Why are the women idiots for demonstrating against Islamic sublimation of women?
Click to expand...

The conclusion just might be that Islam isn't peaceful, and that the direct conflict of two lefty-protected classes might be troublesome.

Imagine a europe, where militant feminists and Islamists are at war. :lol:
 
radcen said:
Which argument would that be? Where did I artificially limit the question to solely within US borders?
Click to expand...

You cannot defend your accusation and the longer you continue this charade the worse it becomes. You cannot make a universal claim then run away when people prove the claim wrong.
 
Brischera said:
You cannot defend your accusation and the longer you continue this charade the worse it becomes. You cannot make a universal claim then run away when people prove the claim wrong.
Click to expand...
:lol: In other words, you cannot point to anything or anywhere that I said, or even implied, that the question was limited to within US borders. So, instead of taking the high road and admitting as much, you stand defiant with a weak indignant stubborn restating of your erroneous claim. Noted.

Here's my direct challenge to you: Point out specifically where I said, or implied, that the question was limited to solely within US borders. Time for you to put up or shut up.

I'll wait, but I won't hold my breath.
 
radcen said:
:lol: In other words, you cannot point to anything or anywhere that I said, or even implied, that the question was limited to within US borders. So, instead of taking the high road and admitting as much, you stand defiant with a weak indignant stubborn restating of your erroneous claim. Noted.

Here's my direct challenge to you: Point out specifically where I said, or implied, that the question was limited to solely within US borders. Time for you to put up or shut up.

I'll wait, but I won't hold my breath.
Click to expand...

I do not need to show where you limited your claim to US borders and my response is not a strawman or cherry picking.

YOU CLAIMED ISLAM IS INHERENTLY VIOLENT

Do you understand YOUR OWN claim? I do not believe you do. Since you made a universal claim it is subject to universal testing and when I tested your claim it failed.

Get over it. Admitting you are wrong is not the end of the world.
 
Brischera said:
I do not need to show where you limited your claim to US borders and my response is not a strawman or cherry picking.

YOU CLAIMED ISLAM IS INHERENTLY VIOLENT

Do you understand YOUR OWN claim? I do not believe you do. Since you made a universal claim it is subject to universal testing and when I tested your claim it failed.

Get over it. Admitting you are wrong is not the end of the world.
Click to expand...
Right. You can't back it up. You won't even quote any post where I allegedly made this claim. Noted.

Carry on. :2wave:
 
American said:
How many people did Jesus kill, and how many people did Mohammed kill?
Click to expand...

Those who are ignorant and who have predetermined they must defend Islam by any means necessary are not interested in comparing apples to apples. Doing so would only undermine all their b.s.

It is really little more than a conditioned response - any time Islam is the subject, it acts as the dinner bell does to Pavlov's pooch, and a ready made contingent will arrive to defend, and all without any real clue as to what they are defending and why they are defending it. They just know they must because it is the fashion of others who also think it is a must.
 
Brischera said:
I do not need to show where you limited your claim to US borders and my response is not a strawman or cherry picking.

YOU CLAIMED ISLAM IS INHERENTLY VIOLENT

Do you understand YOUR OWN claim? I do not believe you do. Since you made a universal claim it is subject to universal testing and when I tested your claim it failed.

Get over it. Admitting you are wrong is not the end of the world.
Click to expand...

Islam is the creation of a war lord who tortured and killed people, who raped the wives of those he killed, who had sex with children and who then spread the ideology he created at the point of a sword -- an ideology crafted in order to create legions of fellow warriors bound to him as a way to continue his rampages.

What about that ISN'T violent to you?
 
Gardener said:
Islam is the creation of a war lord who tortured and killed people, who raped the wives of those he killed, who had sex with children and who then spread the ideology he created at the point of a sword -- an ideology crafted in order to create legions of fellow warriors bound to him as a way to continue his rampages.

What about that ISN'T violent to you?
Click to expand...

I cannot even pretend to take people like you seriously. The hypocrisy is just too funny.
 
Brischera said:
I cannot even pretend to take people like you seriously. The hypocrisy is just too funny.
Click to expand...

I'm curious -- are you a Muslim, or have you simply predetermined you must defend it?

If the act of telling the truth about Mohammad elicits your derision, there are really only two possibilities here -- you either know nothing and are acting from ignorance, or you do know and are acting dishonestly to defend the murderer who created the ideology you follow.
 
Gardener said:
I'm curious -- are you a Muslim, or have you simply predetermined you must defend it?

If the act of telling the truth about Mohammad elicits your derision, there are really only two possibilities here -- you either know nothing and are acting from ignorance, or you do know and are acting dishonestly to defend the murderer who created the ideology you follow.
Click to expand...

This is the common tactic of those who have no ability for dialogue. Simply try to make it personal because you have no other options. It was Christians who nuked civilians. It was Christians who ran a global pedophile protection racket that allowed untold numbers of children to be raped by the orders of the highest officials. Yet you want to pretend Islam is evil? Like I said, the hypocrisy. The most embarrassing part here is you ignore the facts. You will hone in on whether or not this poster is a muslim, atheist, or christian, etc. Why? Because unless it is reduced to the unbelievably and useless personal level you have nothing to contribute.
 
Gardener said:
I'm curious -- are you a Muslim, or have you simply predetermined you must defend it?

If the act of telling the truth about Mohammad elicits your derision, there are really only two possibilities here -- you either know nothing and are acting from ignorance, or you do know and are acting dishonestly to defend the murderer who created the ideology you follow.
Click to expand...
There's the "white liberal guilt" possibility, too.
 
radcen said:
There's the "white liberal guilt" possibility, too.
Click to expand...

I like that phrase because it shows how stupid people can be when they are desperate for anything to justify their position. That phrase was born out of an emotional need for racists to continue their rhetoric yet create cover so when people like Limbaugh began testing it he realized honesty is meaningless because his audience is generally just as racist and dishonest as he is. As well as mentally ill for cheering things like reporters being taken hostage.
 
Brischera said:
This is the common tactic of those who have no ability for dialogue. Simply try to make it personal because you have no other options. It was Christians who nuked civilians. It was Christians who ran a global pedophile protection racket that allowed untold numbers of children to be raped by the orders of the highest officials. Yet you want to pretend Islam is evil? Like I said, the hypocrisy. The most embarrassing part here is you ignore the facts. You will hone in on whether or not this poster is a muslim, atheist, or christian, etc. Why? Because unless it is reduced to the unbelievably and useless personal level you have nothing to contribute.
Click to expand...

I have not ignored any facts. Mohammad was a warlord. He murdered people, raped women and instructed his followers to rape women in front of their husbands. He had sex with at least one very young child, and who knows how many more. The so-called religion he created was spread through violence.

These are all facts.

You are the person trying to avoid facts here, first by crafting sophistry using a very limited sampling crafted to give a false impression, and now by your derision as you go on the offensive against the facts about Mohammad. The vehemence of your response gives a certain impression as to the possible cause, but if you are not honest enough to admit that cause, you are certainly free to continue on as you are doing.
 
Gardener said:
I have not ignored any facts. Mohammad was a warlord. He murdered people, raped women and instructed his followers to rape women in front of their husbands. He had sex with at least one very young child, and who knows how many more. The so-called religion he created was spread through violence.

These are all facts.

You are the person trying to avoid facts here, first by crafting sophistry using a very limited sampling crafted to give a false impression, and now by your derision as you go on the offensive against the facts about Mohammad. The vehemence of your response gives a certain impression as to the possible cause, but if you are not honest enough to admit that cause, you are certainly free to continue on as you are doing.
Click to expand...

Okay, thanks for your feedback.
 
radcen said:
There's the "white liberal guilt" possibility, too.
Click to expand...

White guilt, perhaps, but there is nothing actually liberal about it.

Now, I realize the actual liberals like Bill Maher and Sam Harris are horribly outnumbered on the left by no-nothing apologists for this least liberal ideology on the planet, but I think it does a disservice to actual liberals to assume the mindless defense of Islam is a liberal trait. It is really more of a fundamentalist leftist trait.
 
1905056.jpg


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/middleeast/isis-enshrines-a-theology-of-rape.html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/05/world/africa/05somalia.html
ISIS video shows beheading of Steven Sotloff - CNN.com
PDF Quran | Holy Quran | Free Download
 
Gardener said:
White guilt, perhaps, but there is nothing actually liberal about it.

Now, I realize the actual liberals like Bill Maher and Sam Harris are horribly outnumbered on the left by no-nothing apologists for this least liberal ideology on the planet, but I think it does a disservice to actual liberals to assume the mindless defense of Islam is a liberal trait. It is really more of a fundamentalist leftist trait.
Click to expand...
Fair point.
 
US Conservative said:
The conclusion just might be that Islam isn't peaceful, and that the direct conflict of two lefty-protected classes might be troublesome.

Imagine a europe, where militant feminists and Islamists are at war. :lol:
Click to expand...

Or a clash between feminists and Islamists is a natural phenomenon where each cancels the other out, much like what we saw here. The clashes should prevent needless build up that could lead to war between them.
 
DDD said:
Or a clash between feminists and Islamists is a natural phenomenon where each cancels the other out, much like what we saw here. The clashes should prevent needless build up that could lead to war between them.
Click to expand...

I didn't see anything cancelled out, I saw two topless women beaten and kicked, and lefties ignoring it. :lol:
 
DDD said:
Or a clash between feminists and Islamists is a natural phenomenon where each cancels the other out, much like what we saw here. The clashes should prevent needless build up that could lead to war between them.
Click to expand...

The problem with the useful idiot portion of the left is their multiculturalist dogmatism where they support feminism if it concerns white women of their own culture, but support the hideous misogyny if it arises from a person of color. They lack the intelligence necessary to see the double standards, and their indoctrination overrides all else.

In their hierarchy of isms, sexism takes a back seat to racism, and they are so terrified of being called racist that they will allow all manner of atrocities to be committed against women to prove it. The rape scandal in Rotherham and other ares in Britain are a perfect example, where authorities turned a blind eye to Muslims raping underage British girls (and following Mohammad's example there) because they had so been brow beaten into submission by political correctness that they would rather sacrifice their own children than criticize Islam.
 
US Conservative said:
Which in your view was worse? (I know getting to the heart of the matter is difficult for leftists-to state the truth is seen as "hateful", despite it being obviously true)

Lemme guess, they are both "equally" bad. :lol:
Click to expand...

The women being beaten.
But then again you do like throw insults.
Please define leftist?
 
Riveroaks said:
You need to be really good to find where it is buried in the Quran.

Take a look at 56:36, 56:22, 78:33.
Click to expand...

Just Islam : Does the Quran really promise Islamic martyrs 72 virgins?

The simple answer is NO! There is no promise of 72 virgins for martyrs, terrorists or suicide bombers anywhere in the Quran.

The section many people claim promises this is Chapter (78) sūrat l-naba (The Great News). The controversy is due to the poor translation of ONE verse from verses 29 to 34.
Click to expand...

Compared Translations of the meaning of the Quran - 56:36
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom