• 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 condemns those who seek to 'hijack religion'

That's a wild leap. No that isn't what I said. Closed minded fear mongering is a problem. Radicals are a problem. Not religion itself.
Are there "radical Christians" out there beheading non Christians today?
 
Tough to do when the US President has made it a religious conflict. Though so far he has only been critical of one religion.

Obama did not make it a religious conflict and neither did he criticize a religion.
 
Had Obama been critical of Jews on their "high horse" would that have made any difference to you?
No, because he wasn't critical of any religion. He wasn't critical of Christians, he wasn't critical of Muslims, he wasn't critical of Jews. He was critical of evil people who commit their evil acts under the guise of religion, even if their actions in no way are supported by the religion they claim to follow.

This isn't hard to understand.
 
No, because he wasn't critical of any religion. He wasn't critical of Christians, he wasn't critical of Muslims, he wasn't critical of Jews. He was critical of evil people who commit their evil acts under the guise of religion, even if their actions in no way are supported by the religion they claim to follow.

This isn't hard to understand.

What makes Obama qualified to say what is and isn't supported by Islam?
 
What makes Obama qualified to say what is and isn't supported by Islam?
Aside from the fact he's the President so he'll have more than enough people around who are experts in anything he wants to know, the fact that Muslims all over the world have denounced the actions of ISIS would be a good start.
 
No, because he wasn't critical of any religion. He wasn't critical of Christians, he wasn't critical of Muslims, he wasn't critical of Jews. He was critical of evil people who commit their evil acts under the guise of religion, even if their actions in no way are supported by the religion they claim to follow. This isn't hard to understand.

So Barrack Obama came out strongly against generalized evildoers. I can see why you voted for a man of such obvious insight.
 
Aside from the fact he's the President so he'll have more than enough people around who are experts in anything he wants to know, the fact that Muslims all over the world have denounced the actions of ISIS would be a good start.

There are many muslims all over the world suporting IS and other jihadi terrorist organizations.
Apart from that, since when did the US President become a religious authority?
 
So Barrack Obama came out strongly against generalized evildoers. I can see why you voted for a man of such obvious insight.
Yes, I agree you were completely wrong and completely misunderstood what Obama said.

Thank you for admitting that. It was very big of you.
There are many muslims all over the world suporting IS and other jihadi terrorist organizations.
Apart from that, since when did the US President become a religious authority?
Just like there were many "Christians" who joined the Ku Klux Klan.

That was Obama's point. Pay attention.
 
Last edited:
Slyfox696;1064300329 Just like there were many "Christians" who joined the Ku Klux Klan. That was Obama's point. Pay attention.[/QUOTE said:
If you knew anything about the KKK you would know this isn't true. But this feeble attempt to seek an equivalence where none exists shows you are really not interested in discussing this seriously.
 
Aside from the fact he's the President so he'll have more than enough people arounhttp://www.investigativeproject.org/3869/egyptian-magazine-muslim-brotherhood-infiltrates#d who are experts in anything he wants to know, the fact that Muslims all over the world have denounced the actions of ISIS would be a good start.
His advisers tell him all he needs to know, huh? I believe you. Egyptian Magazine: Muslim Brotherhood Infiltrates Obama Administration :: The Investigative Project on Terrorism
 
The leftist lies continue, ignoring every bit of historical evidence. Which came first, the lie or the leftist?

There you go, all denying reality and throwing around stereotypical partisan generalizations. :coffeepap
 
There you go, all denying reality and throwing around stereotypical partisan generalizations. :coffeepap
Do you really need more evidence that leftists lie? Who would you like as an example? The US President?
 
Are there "radical Christians" out there beheading non Christians today?

There are those out there killing, yes.

This was done by a Christian extremist: Wisconsin Sikh Temple massacre, Aug. 5, 2012.

As was this: Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church shooting, July 27, 2008. On July 27, 2008, Christian Right sympathizer Jim David Adkisson walked into the Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee during a children’s play and began shooting people at random.

And this: In 1994, the radical anti-abortionist and Army of God member attacked a Planned Parenthood clinic in Brookline, Massachusetts, shooting and killing receptionists Shannon Lowney and Lee Ann Nichols and wounding several others

10 of the Worst Terror Attacks by Extreme Christians and Far-Right White Men | Alternet

There are more. And we could do this all day. The point is you will excuse them as not representing the whole, and they don't. But neither do radical Muslims. The problem is radicals and not religion.
 
There are those out there killing, yes. This was done by a Christian extremist: Wisconsin Sikh Temple massacre, Aug. 5, 2012.
Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia You've just supported my comments about leftists.
As was this: Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church shooting, July 27, 2008. On July 27, 2008, Christian Right sympathizer Jim David Adkisson walked into the Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee during a children’s play and began shooting people at random.
This is true! This was the response.
Many Unitarian Universalist congregations held special vigils and services in response to the Knoxville shooting.[13] The Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church scheduled a rededication ceremony on August 3, 2008, at which the Rev. Dr. John A. Buehrens, a former president of the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) and former pastor of TVUUC spoke.[14] The UUA president, Rev. William G. Sinkford, spoke at a vigil held at Second Presbyterian Church, in Knoxville, on July 28, 2008.[15] A relief fund was created by the UUA and its Thomas Jefferson District to aid those affected by the shooting.[16] On August 10, 2008, the Unitarian Universalist Association took out a full-page ad in the New York Times.[17] The ad carried the message, "Our Doors and Our Hearts Will Remain Open". The Unitarian Universalist Association carried comprehensive coverage of the response of the UU faith community online.[18]

The TVUUC Board voted to rename the 'greeting hall' to honor Greg McKendry, citing his outgoing and friendly personality, and to rename the church library to honor Linda Kraeger, citing her work as an author and professor. An oil painting of Greg McKendry was hung over the fireplace in the greeting hall.

And this: In 1994, the radical anti-abortionist and Army of God member attacked a Planned Parenthood clinic in Brookline, Massachusetts, shooting and killing receptionists Shannon Lowney and Lee Ann Nichols and wounding several others
You can read this and decide yourself on this 'Army of God" thing.John Salvi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

10 of the Worst Terror Attacks by Extreme Christians and Far-Right White Men | AlternetThere are more. And we could do this all day. The point is you will excuse them as not representing the whole, and they don't. But neither do radical Muslims. The problem is radicals and not religion.
I'm sure you could do it all day, and have them gathered together in your computer. But the thing is that there should be some credibility attached to these accusations and not from websites that are only poorly written gibberish.
 
The dishonesty comes when one goes on about the Crusades and fails--refuses?--to mention Muslim aggression that took place prior to and during the same period.

Alright...fair enough.

Here's a timeline from the Latin Library that covers Islam in Europe from 359-1291, AD. A few key dates of note that may be of interest to readers:

614: Persians sack Jerusalem. damaging the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in the process.

624: Muhammad broke with his Jewish supporters because they refused to recognize him as a prophet and adopt Islam.

632: Death of Muhammad. His father-in-law, Abu-Bakr (first Caliph), and Umar devised a system to allow Islam to sustain religious and political stability. Accepting the name of caliph ("deputy of the Prophet"), Abu-Bakr begins a military exhibition to enforce the caliph's authority over Arabian followers of Muhammad. Abu-Bakr then moved northward, defeating Byzantine and Persian forces.

633: Muslims conquer Syria and Iraq.

637: Jerusalem falls to invading Muslim forces.

668: First Siege of Constantinople: This attack lasts off and on for seven years, with the Muslim forces generally spending the winters on the island of Cyzicus, a few miles south of Constantinople, and only sailing against the city during the spring and summer months. The Greeks are able to fend off repeated attacks with a weapon desperately feared by the Arabs: Greek Fire.

August 23, 676: Birth of Charles Martel (Charles the Hammer) in Herstal, Wallonia, Belgium, as the illegitimate son of Pippin II. Serving as Mayor of the Palace of the kingdom of the Franks, Charles would lead a force of Christians that turn back a Muslim raiding party near Poitiers (or Tours) which, according to many historians, would effectively halt the advance of Islam against Christianity in the West.

677: Muslims send a large fleet against Constantinople in an effort to finally break the city, but they are defeated so badly through the Byzantine use of Greek Fire that they are forced to pay an indemnity to the Emperor.

714: Birth of Pippin III (Pippin the Short) in Jupille (Belgium). Son of Charles Martel and father of Charlemagne, in 0759 Pippin would capture Narbonne, the last Muslim stronghold in France, and thereby drive Islam out of France.

722: Battle of Covadonga: Pelayo, (690-737) Visigoth noble who had been elected the first King of Asturias (718-0737), defeats a Muslim army at Alcama near Covadonga. This is generally regarded as the first real Christian victory over the Muslims in the Reconquista.

October 10, 732: Battle of Tours: With perhaps 1,500 soldiers, Charles Martel halts a Muslim force of around 40,000 to 60,000 cavalry under Abd el-Rahman Al Ghafiqi from moving farther into Europe. Many regard this battle as being decisive in that it saved Europe from Muslim control.

750 - 850: The Four Orthodox Schools of Islamic Law were established.

850: Perfectus, a Christian priest in Muslim Cordova, is executed after he refuses to retract numerous insults he made about the Prophet Muhammed. Numerous other priests, monks, and laity would follow as Christians became caught up in a zest for martyrdom.

851: Abd al-Rahman II has eleven young Christians executed in the city of Cordova after they deliberately seek out martyrdom by insulting the Prophet .Muhammed.
 
(Continued from post #520):

859: Muslim invaders capture the Sicilian city of Castrogiovanni (Enna), slaughtering several thousand inhabitants.

1009: Caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, founder of the Druze sect and sixth Fatimid Caliph in Egypt, orders the Holy Sepulcher and all Christian buildings in Jerusalem be destroyed. In Europe a rumor develops that a "Prince of Babylon" had ordered the destruction of the Holy Sepulcher at the instigation of the Jews. Attacks on Jewish communities in cities like Rouen, Orelans, and Mainz ensue and this rumor helps lay the basis for massacres of Jewish communities by Crusaders marching to the Holy Land. (Consider the "lynch-pin" moment for the beginning of the Crusades)

1026: Richard II of Normandy leads a group of several hundred armed men on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the belief that the Day of Judgment had arrived.

1050: Byzantine emperor Constantine IX Monomachos restores the complex of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem.

March 12, 1088: Urban II is elected pope. An active supporter of the Gregorian reforms, Urban would become responsible for launching the First Crusade (1096-99).

December 31, 1097: First Battle of Harenc. Turkish prisoners were dragged within sight of the walls of Antioch and beheaded.

Jun 14, 1098: Peter Bartholomew discovers the supposed Holy Lance (the weapon which had stabbed Jesus during his crucifixion.) Crusader morale skyrockets.

Jul 15, 1099: In the only fully coordinated operation of the First Crusade, Godfrey's forces succeed in scaling the walls of Jerusalem (near Herod's Gate) through the effective use of a massive siege tower and ladders. Once in the city, the Crusaders massacre the garrison of Fatimid Moslems and a large percentage of the Moslem and Jewish population.

I think that's enough...

For those interested, pay very close attention to events from the following timeframes: 632, 850, 1026, 1050, 1088, and 1098. What's the connection between each event in time according to the above timeline? http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/imperialism/notes/islamchron.html
 
Last edited:
Do you really need more evidence that leftists lie? Who would you like as an example? The US President?

Bush lied. Does this mean rightist lie? Don't you see how stupid you're being?
 
Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia You've just supported my comments about leftists.
This is true! This was the response.

You can read this and decide yourself on this 'Army of God" thing.John Salvi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm sure you could do it all day, and have them gathered together in your computer. But the thing is that there should be some credibility attached to these accusations and not from websites that are only poorly written gibberish.

You miss the point again. How am I do get through to you? I doubt anyone who does this is stuff is actually Christian or Muslim for that matter. They use religion. This is the point being made by Obama and by me.
 
There are those out there killing, yes.

This was done by a Christian extremist: Wisconsin Sikh Temple massacre, Aug. 5, 2012.

As was this: Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church shooting, July 27, 2008. On July 27, 2008, Christian Right sympathizer Jim David Adkisson walked into the Knoxville Unitarian Universalist Church in Knoxville, Tennessee during a children’s play and began shooting people at random.

And this: In 1994, the radical anti-abortionist and Army of God member attacked a Planned Parenthood clinic in Brookline, Massachusetts, shooting and killing receptionists Shannon Lowney and Lee Ann Nichols and wounding several others

10 of the Worst Terror Attacks by Extreme Christians and Far-Right White Men | Alternet

There are more. And we could do this all day. The point is you will excuse them as not representing the whole, and they don't. But neither do radical Muslims. The problem is radicals and not religion.
So you view these radical jihadist attacks as just anomalies carried out by just a few, contrary to their own stated goals, and support documented amongst the wider Muslim community?

I mean, sure you can show me individual cases of mentally disturbed acts, but nothing on the scale of what is going on today with ISIS and it is patently dishonest to equate the two in any way.
 
(Continued from post #520):

859: Muslim invaders capture the Sicilian city of Castrogiovanni (Enna), slaughtering several thousand inhabitants.

1009: Caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, founder of the Druze sect and sixth Fatimid Caliph in Egypt, orders the Holy Sepulcher and all Christian buildings in Jerusalem be destroyed. In Europe a rumor develops that a "Prince of Babylon" had ordered the destruction of the Holy Sepulcher at the instigation of the Jews. Attacks on Jewish communities in cities like Rouen, Orelans, and Mainz ensue and this rumor helps lay the basis for massacres of Jewish communities by Crusaders marching to the Holy Land. (Consider the "lynch-pin" moment for the beginning of the Crusades)

1026: Richard II of Normandy leads a group of several hundred armed men on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the belief that the Day of Judgment had arrived.

1050: Byzantine emperor Constantine IX Monomachos restores the complex of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem.

March 12, 1088: Urban II is elected pope. An active supporter of the Gregorian reforms, Urban would become responsible for launching the First Crusade (1096-99).

December 31, 1097: First Battle of Harenc. Turkish prisoners were dragged within sight of the walls of Antioch and beheaded.

Jun 14, 1098: Peter Bartholomew discovers the supposed Holy Lance (the weapon which had stabbed Jesus during his crucifixion.) Crusader morale skyrockets.

Jul 15, 1099: In the only fully coordinated operation of the First Crusade, Godfrey's forces succeed in scaling the walls of Jerusalem (near Herod's Gate) through the effective use of a massive siege tower and ladders. Once in the city, the Crusaders massacre the garrison of Fatimid Moslems and a large percentage of the Moslem and Jewish population.

I think that's enough...

For those interested, pay very close attention to events from the following timeframes: 632, 850, 1026, 1050, 1088, and 1098. What's the connection between each event in time according to the above timeline? http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/imperialism/notes/islamchron.html
Looks to me like the Crusadrs were a response to Muslim aggressions.
 
Back
Top Bottom