• 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!

Obama: "ISIL Is Not Islamic"

Yes, which has zero to do with the mythical "defense of Islam" that you accused someone of.



I'm not "offended," I just know damn well why it's being done. Pure hackery.

Your real reason is nothing deeper then you are offended at any criticism of the current progressive occupant of the white house...(Barack "Hussein" Obama).
 
Your real reason is nothing deeper then you are offended at any criticism of the current progressive occupant of the white house...(Barack "Hussein" Obama).

False, but thanks for playing. You should probably not be in the business of telling others what they think, since you're not very good at it.
 
You are attempting to speak for me...however you are only showing your own racism as well as your inability to distinguish between race and religion. I don't have a problem with most Muslims....just the fanatical ones and those who do not condemn the extremists who are hijacking their religion. I highlight Obama's middle name because it matches the last name of the late "butcher of Bagdad...Saddam Hussein....the character that led the US to get involved in two bloody wars. One in 1991 and one in 2003. And by the way, Saddam Hussein was a secularist.....unless he saw political benefit and bringing up religion.

While there is a distinction between religion and race, this type of subtle bigotry is a form of racism, as it is the intersectionality of race and religion.

Of course, you would know this if you read more in your spare time.
 
While there is a distinction between religion and race, this type of subtle bigotry is a form of racism, as it is the intersectionality of race and religion.
Nice try but in fact Islam is everywhere, as is Christianity. They are not the same as race at all.
 
Islam is not a race.

It's odd though that even atheists feel they have to defend Islam, one of the worst religions to ever strike mankind..

Murderers find a way to justify their actions. The words in the book aren't important. ISIL would have been just as evil if they had bibles.
 
Nice try but in fact Islam is everywhere, as is Christianity. They are not the same as race at all.

The sad part is you don't even realize that extremists hungry for power will justify using ANYTHING. The same was done with the bible as is with the Koran now.

It isn't the text that is the problem it is the extremists. Now if you want to go against the extremists, I'll stand with you any day of the week. When you try to blame a book though for the troubles, that is where I draw the line.
 
Murderers find a way to justify their actions. The words in the book aren't important. ISIL would have been just as evil if they had bibles.
But they don't have Bibles, they have the Koran. And of course Christianity, and any religion except Islam, has nothing to do with ISIS.
 
The sad part is you don't even realize that extremists hungry for power will justify using ANYTHING. The same was done with the bible as is with the Koran now.
Feeling sad is a rather pathetic excuse for gaining attention. Are you denying that these are Islamic extremists, or is that they are Muslims which is making you sad?
It isn't the text that is the problem it is the extremists. Now if you want to go against the extremists, I'll stand with you any day of the week. When you try to blame a book though for the troubles, that is where I draw the line.
Are trying to make the case that the extremists weren't inspired by the text? That's another sad part.
 
Feeling sad is a rather pathetic excuse for gaining attention. Are you denying that these are Islamic extremists, or is that they are Muslims which is making you sad?

I think you need to re-read my statements. I said it was sad, not that I was sad. Your comments demonstrate a lack of reading comprehension.

Are trying to make the case that the extremists weren't inspired by the text? That's another sad part.

People are responsible solely for THEIR own actions. Tell me, when there is gun violence, do you blame the gun, the bullets, or the shooter? Same thing here. The book is an object, the text is an object. The object doesn't MAKE people act. Sad you don't realize that. You must hate guns too since you like to blame objects for the woes of the world.
 
"Now let’s make two things clear: ISIL is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim."

Oh really? There has been an ongoing war, even before ISIS, with Sunni and Shia Muslims killing each other, and both killing Christians - so exactly who is innocent and who is guilty?

Whether you like it or not, the name of the terrorist group is 'Islamic State'. They want a government governed strictly by Sharia, or Islamic, law. So yes, they are Islamic...

That's right people...

If Obama disagrees with that you are the religion you say you are that means you're not that religion

Thank god this kind of stupid standard isn't actually the standard, or else all the idiots accusing Obama of lying about being Christian and really being Muslim would suddenly have a leg to stand on

Yes, Isis is fundamentally Islamic in its makeup and foundational philosophy. Saying and acknowledging that fact and reality doesn't mean all Muslims agree with their stances or interpretations. This ridiculous attempt to deny reality in a backwards attempt at bending over backwards to disassociate them from a clear factor in their actions is not just dishonest but irresponsible. If you want to specific that they are a fundamentalist version, that's fine. But to claim they're not Islamic is just pure hogwash

I think what the President was trying to do was make a distinction between Islam in the truest since of the religion and how the religion has been co-opted by Muslim extremist. This argument has been going around since 9/11 and I don't think anyone who has their heals dug in to believe anything different about the Islamic faith other than it's all about conflict. They're perspective will likely never change.

All I can say is this: Just as Christianity has its loons and cult spin-offs, so does Islam. And although my reading of the Qur'an leads me to believe that overall the religion is peaceful at its core, there are some who take it too literally and use its tenants to cause conflict, i.e., Al-Quada, Taliban, ISIL just to name a few. To that, it's no different from Christians who take a literal view of specific passages of Biblical scripture to espouse their point of view to make a verse mean whatever they want it to mean, i.e., "separation of the races" is a common one. From Jim Jones to Waco (yeah, I said it! though I do believe the fed was wrong in how that situation was handled) to Heaven's Gate, both religions, if not ALL religions have their nut-jobs.

IMO, the President is right. ISIL is not Islamic. They take the Muslim religion and subvert it in the same way as an cult does to attract followers to their cause.

I found this website that provides details on just about every religion known to man. The part of the site I've linked to here covers Islam. Under the "Topics" section, there's a link to another webpage that compares Islam and Christianity. I would encourage folks interested in learning more about this religion or any other religion, but this Islam in particular other than the myths or fearful parts, such as, Sharia Law, to check it out.

Disclaimer: I'm in no way trying to convert anyone to Islam. However, I do think that in order to understand a thing you have to learn about it....separate fact from fiction.
 
Last edited:
Murderers find a way to justify their actions. The words in the book aren't important. ISIL would have been just as evil if they had bibles.

I don't think so, not unless the Bible thumper was going by OT guidelines which are filled with holy rituals, punishments for social injustices and calls from God to go to war. Otherwise, the NT did away with such things. Now, that doesn't mean that some people still don't use certain OT passages to convince people that what they say is true. The example of the separation of the races or "I [God] knew you while you were but in the womb" as justification against abortion. (And please, let's not go there, okay; I'm just giving examples of how people sometimes use scripture to their advantage.) People twist the words in scripture from the Bible and the Qur'on all the time to suit their own agenda. It's only through deep study is a deeper understanding of Scripture attained.
 
I think you need to re-read my statements. I said it was sad, not that I was sad. Your comments demonstrate a lack of reading comprehension.
So youu are not sad at all then? That's good to hear.
People are responsible solely for THEIR own actions.
No, they are not. Many are taught to behave in a certain way and they will behave in that way. There is plenty of information available on the subject, and you might start with 'brainwashing', or the Third Way experiment in California.
Tell me, when there is gun violence, do you blame the gun, the bullets, or the shooter? Same thing here. The book is an object, the text is an object. The object doesn't MAKE people act. Sad you don't realize that. You must hate guns too since you like to blame objects for the woes of the world.
Be an adult.
 
No, they are not. Many are taught to behave in a certain way and they will behave in that way. There is plenty of information available on the subject, and you might start with 'brainwashing', or the Third Way experiment in California.

So you don't believe in personal responsibility, you believe in blaming others. BTW, even in your example it is PEOPLE, not a book, that does the brainwashing. If I leave a book on the table, it doesn't brainwash someone. It is PEOPLE (i.e. extremists) that are the problem, not a text. You fail to grasp reality and instead blame a book. How pathetic.

Be an adult.

Take your own advice, what I said you cannot refute. You are just as bad as those who blame guns instead of the people.
 
I don't think so, not unless the Bible thumper was going by OT guidelines which are filled with holy rituals, punishments for social injustices and calls from God to go to war. Otherwise, the NT did away with such things. Now, that doesn't mean that some people still don't use certain OT passages to convince people that what they say is true. The example of the separation of the races or "I [God] knew you while you were but in the womb" as justification against abortion. (And please, let's not go there, okay; I'm just giving examples of how people sometimes use scripture to their advantage.) People twist the words in scripture from the Bible and the Qur'on all the time to suit their own agenda. It's only through deep study is a deeper understanding of Scripture attained.

That's total nonsense. There are plenty of U.S.-based Christian groups that are very adamantly for killing gay people, for instance. They just can't do it because secular society moderates their behavior. However, that doesn't stop them from going to places like Uganda, where a very heavily evangelical Christian population almost passed a death-penalty-for-gays law. They still passed a law requiring life in prison for any homosexual caught in the country. This isn't Islam, it's CHRISTIANITY!
 
I don't think so, not unless the Bible thumper was going by OT guidelines which are filled with holy rituals, punishments for social injustices and calls from God to go to war. Otherwise, the NT did away with such things. Now, that doesn't mean that some people still don't use certain OT passages to convince people that what they say is true. The example of the separation of the races or "I [God] knew you while you were but in the womb" as justification against abortion. (And please, let's not go there, okay; I'm just giving examples of how people sometimes use scripture to their advantage.) People twist the words in scripture from the Bible and the Qur'on all the time to suit their own agenda. It's only through deep study is a deeper understanding of Scripture attained.

The difference between JudeoChristian beliefs and teaching and Islamic teachings in the way we view those beliefs and teachings. Modern day Jews and Christians know that the Old Testament accounts were in a specific time, place, and context and were part of a continuing story of 'the chosen people of God'. They were not intended as instruction for us to emulate now. Likewise modern day Christians understand that Jesus was the promised Messiah and was the fulfillment of the Law and paid the penalty for all of us who break the Law as well as demonstrating that this life is not all there is but that eternal life awaits us. Both believing Jews and Christians alike will have their sinners and bad eggs, but overall live their lives in a society that is fair, just, and emulates the compassion and concern for people that we believe God asks of us.

Islam on the other hand, regardless of whatever subgroup it identifies with, believes Allah commands Islam to bring all people on Earth under the authority and law of Allah and all who resist are worthy of contempt and death. For Islam it is not what is in a person's heart that counts, but whether the person is subject to the authority of Allah and those he commands to enforce it. Militant Islam chooses to utilize terror and chaos to accomplish that. Less militant Islam is more likely to bide their unlimited time and wait for the opportunity to make it happen. But EVERYWHERE that there are enough Muslims to be noticeable, there is a push for more and more accommodation for Islam and more push for more of Shariah Law to be implemented. This inevitably increases as the Muslim population increases. And EVERYWHERE that Muslims obtain a majority, it will be Muslim Law that prevails and all other is either outlawed or substantially oppressed.

For those who value their faith, their beliefs, their personal liberties, Islam is something to be seriously resisted.
 
So you don't believe in personal responsibility, you believe in blaming others. BTW, even in your example it is PEOPLE, not a book, that does the brainwashing. If I leave a book on the table, it doesn't brainwash someone. It is PEOPLE (i.e. extremists) that are the problem, not a text. You fail to grasp reality and instead blame a book. How pathetic.
Extremists are bad. Great call.
Take your own advice, what I said you cannot refute. You are just as bad as those who blame guns instead of the people.
Maybe worse!
 
That's total nonsense. There are plenty of U.S.-based Christian groups that are very adamantly for killing gay people, for instance. They just can't do it because secular society moderates their behavior. However, that doesn't stop them from going to places like Uganda, where a very heavily evangelical Christian population almost passed a death-penalty-for-gays law. They still passed a law requiring life in prison for any homosexual caught in the country. This isn't Islam, it's CHRISTIANITY!

What is the name of this Christian group which wants to kill Gays and how many members does it have?
 
That's exactly what he meant, and it is an unfortunate way of saying it. Just like as a small business owner, I knew what he meant when he said that I didn't build it by myself, but I also knew it was going to go over like a lead balloon.

I agree. But an audience also has a responsibility to try to understand and not overblow and misrepresent what is being said.
 
I agree. But an audience also has a responsibility to try to understand and not overblow and misrepresent what is being said.
It must have been the fault of the teleprompter. We know that The Silver Tongued Orator would not say anything this stupid on his own.
 
What is the name of this Christian group which wants to kill Gays and how many members does it have?

There isn't just one, there are plenty. You can Google them yourself, I'm sure, but one of the most prominent is Abiding Truth Ministries, headed by Scott Lively, who was directly involved in influencing Ugandan Christians to push for the death-penalty-for-gays laws.
 
It must have been the fault of the teleprompter. We know that The Silver Tongued Orator would not say anything this stupid on his own.

Didn't say that. But reasonable people understand they should listen with a reasonable hear.
 
False, but thanks for playing. You should probably not be in the business of telling others what they think, since you're not very good at it.

Well I have your reason pegged. You just cannot stand criticism of "Hussein" Obama.
 
There isn't just one, there are plenty. You can Google them yourself, I'm sure, but one of the most prominent is Abiding Truth Ministries, headed by Scott Lively, who was directly involved in influencing Ugandan Christians to push for the death-penalty-for-gays laws.

So one group ..

Avg. size, 10 members, all related.

False equivocations are false.

Ideas have outcomes.

ISIL's outcome is murder death kill.

Christians outcome is peace, love and justice. [citing fringe patriot sociopath groups is a deflection]

(ISIL is not a fringe group, but a counter reaction to Western abuse and an implementation of Islam [not interpretation])
 
Didn't say that. But reasonable people understand they should listen with a reasonable hear.
This inept bumbler is the President of the United States and still needs his followers to decipher what he was really trying to say. It becomes ever more pathetic for both as time passes.
 
There isn't just one, there are plenty. You can Google them yourself, I'm sure, but one of the most prominent is Abiding Truth Ministries, headed by Scott Lively, who was directly involved in influencing Ugandan Christians to push for the death-penalty-for-gays laws.

When it is you making the accusation it is you who should support that accusation.

But this Scott Lively you mentioned, and his partner, are obvious nut cases. He did oppose the death penalty for Gays in Uganda, so that one part is incorrect,though he is still crazy and obviously not a disciple of The Golden Rule. It's odd also that Christians would join Muslims in their harsh treatment of Gay people.

I couldn't find how many members they have.
 
Back
Top Bottom