• 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!

Pastor who burned Koran demands retribution

Grant said:
Are you quite sure you understand the difference between Muslims and Muslims extremists? Here's a guy who obviously knows something on the subject.

YouTube - Allan West: Islam will destory Western civilisation
Click to expand...

Oh, now there's a nice balanced opinion. If Islam were going to destroy western civilization, it seems that they would have done it by now.

Grant said:
Then why did they say anything? Wasn't it, at the very least, indiscreet of them to be broadcasting this pastor's act to the Muslim world and predicting violence? Wouldn't it have been smarter of them to just shut up?? If speaking out is the issue here, as seems to be the case. why not mention those two, as well as all the US media??
Click to expand...

You make it sound as if it was the voices of reason were the ones broadcasting this publicity stunt, instead of telling the religious nutter that his actions were likely to have some negative consequences.

Sorry, but that's not how it was.


Grant said:
Well, he certainly made his case, didn't he?
Click to expand...

So, he proved that Christianity was the correct religion, and that the Muslims were evil, by having set off the extremists? Sure, that's what the Bible says.... somewhere... just can't find it right now.

Grant said:
Again, you appear to know little about Muslims and Muslim extremists. Have you ever actually looked at the Koran? Visited Islamic websites? Heard their preachers? Listened to their leaders?
Click to expand...

Do you seriously mean to say that the billion and a half or so Muslims in the world are all violent people out to destroy civilization? Is that the point you're making? It seems to be.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Oh, now there's a nice balanced opinion. If Islam were going to destroy western civilization, it seems that they would have done it by now.
Click to expand...

In order to have a "balanced" opinion, why not contradict what the man is saying? Where do you feel he is wrong and why?

And how, if they could, would they have destroyed western civilization by now? Perhaps they are in the process, as he says and Muslims themselves say. Do you think they would lie about something like that? Do you think them incapable?

You make it sound as if it was the voices of reason were the ones broadcasting this publicity stunt, instead of telling the religious nutter that his actions were likely to have some negative consequences.
Click to expand...

I make it sound like they were broadcasting the publicity stunt? They WERE broadcasting the publicity stunt. Don't you think it would have been wiser had they not publicized it? But that's just what they did. You think that when the president of the United States speaks out to an international audience about Islamic issues, nobody listens?

So, he proved that Christianity was the correct religion, and that the Muslims were evil, by having set off the extremists? Sure, that's what the Bible says.... somewhere...just can't find it right now.
Click to expand...

No, and you won't. My point was that the Pastor made his case and we all know it.
Do you seriously mean to say that the billion and a half or so Muslims in the world are all violent people out to destroy civilization? Is that the point you're making? It seems to be
Click to expand...
.

No, I don't think so. I think that most of them want to live in peace, but they are also Muslims and, as was explained, they will follow the teachings of the Koran. Otherwise they would not be Muslims. It certainly seems that that many of their leaders have large ambitions and most Muslims are more likely to follow their leaders, as we have seen, than protest against them.

The few who do speak out, such as the very brave Hirsi Ali or Wata Sultan, require 24 hour guards and are often vilified by the political Left. Ordinary Muslims would be taking a big chance in speaking out and few take the risk.. In fact non Muslims are also often reluctant to speak out for fear of reprisal. This is especially true in Europe, as well as in Florida.
Click to expand...
 
The Giant Noodle said:
These Muslims are insane! They act like drunk children that are hate-filled. People that worship Satan are better people than these Islamic animals!! They are barbarians! They killed 12 people because someone burned their book! 12 people DEAD... horribly murdered.... brutally murdered. Because of a book that was burned. Im all for nuking that whole area and wiping out these crazy people!
[/SIZE]
Click to expand...

I'm all for nuking any religion that promote killing.
NUKE RELIGION not human being.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Do you seriously mean to say that the billion and a half or so Muslims in the world are all violent people out to destroy civilization? Is that the point you're making? It seems to be.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the pivotal question is this: will the majority of Muslims - those that don't want to return to the stone age, do enough to prevent the so called PCism "extremists" from going all the way?

It may not be that the West has to do everything, or that Islam must reform itself internally without foreign interference, but if the average Joe Muslim does his part and the Western military and economic machines do their part

But NO..The majority of Muslims have proven that.

Now, we are rapidly approaching the point (i.e. the next successful attack stateside) where we will no longer have the luxury to distinguish between the good muslims and the bad muslims... the the "neutral" and "good" muslims are not making an effort to distinguish themselves for us..

Ya see, the real numbers of islamic radicals will be a secondary problem in the long run. Whether they constitute 1,2,3,5 or 10% of the muslim population, they will come out on top (ALWAYS) as long as there are a number of countries where they can always regroup to, regenerate, gain new recruits etc. Until we change that there is no way we can really defeat them.

In the number of counties, I'll include the USA (passively)
 
ric27 said:
Perhaps the pivotal question is this: will the majority of Muslims - those that don't want to return to the stone age, do enough to prevent the so called PCism "extremists" from going all the way?

It may not be that the West has to do everything, or that Islam must reform itself internally without foreign interference, but if the average Joe Muslim does his part and the Western military and economic machines do their part

But NO..The majority of Muslims have proven that.

Now, we are rapidly approaching the point (i.e. the next successful attack stateside) where we will no longer have the luxury to distinguish between the good muslims and the bad muslims... the the "neutral" and "good" muslims are not making an effort to distinguish themselves for us..

Ya see, the real numbers of islamic radicals will be a secondary problem in the long run. Whether they constitute 1,2,3,5 or 10% of the muslim population, they will come out on top (ALWAYS) as long as there are a number of countries where they can always regroup to, regenerate, gain new recruits etc. Until we change that there is no way we can really defeat them.

In the number of counties, I'll include the USA (passively)
Click to expand...

So, how do we go about changing that?
 
The Giant Noodle said:
Why? He didnt do ANYTHING wrong. So what if he burned the book? Big deal!
Click to expand...

Hitler burned books. He didn't do anything wrong. No big deal? You don't seem to grasp the damage and destruction that ceremonial book burnings incur.

There are unintended consequences to almost everything we do and decide. This rather large piece of **** decided to burn a Qu'ran with absolutely no care for any troop or effort abroad. I warned people right here on this site last year about this fool's behaviors. The fact that those religious freaks targetted weak UN personnel and not US military personnel shows their depravity. But let's not pretend that there's much of a difference between these Christian zealots and those Islamic zealots. Take away the pampered Disney Land that is America and these book burners would murder you for their twisted sense of God work.
 
Last edited:
SE102 said:
12 people died that means nuclear genocide is necessary. Also it's god's book, AND theirs.
Click to expand...

So....it would be understandable if 12 people in New York died because Muslims abroad burned Bibles? After all...it's God's book AND it is theirs? C'mon. Get over your sense of twisted zealot defense. Or fear of insulting the wrong kind of zealot. Whichever is your hang up.
 
Dittohead not! said:
So, how do we go about changing that?
Click to expand...

Excellent question....finding an acceptable solution, but first of all, we, the west, must accept that, we have a problem with Islam.
 
ric27 said:
Excellent question....finding an acceptable solution, but first of all, we, the west, must accept that, we have a problem with Islam.
Click to expand...

And perhaps not invade another secular nation in the Mid East in the name of fighting a war on Islamic terror.

Perhaps a good start would be to achieve energy independence, so we will no longer have to depend on people who hate us for our economic lifeblood.
 
Dittohead not! said:
And perhaps not invade another secular nation in the Mid East in the name of fighting a war on Islamic terror.

Perhaps a good start would be to achieve energy independence, so we will no longer have to depend on people who hate us for our economic lifeblood.
Click to expand...

Yes, that certainly is valid, but unfortunately, we will live in perpetual warfare for the foreseeable future. Hundreds, if not thousands of years of intermittent warfare running the gamut of low end terrorism to outright conventional, high end warfare.
 
ric27 said:
Excellent question....finding an acceptable solution, but first of all, we, the west, must accept that, we have a problem with Islam.
Click to expand...

This is so typical. You pretend that their's no difference between Middle Eastern Sunni Islam and the nice little Muslim man in Iowa.

Why would that be "first of all?" Before 9/11, nobody in America gave Islam a second thought. Of course, before 9/11 Islamic terrorists and zealots had been targetting the West (especially America) since the 1950s. Weren't we designated as the enemy of Islam by Sayyid Qutb before we even supported Israel? Weren't our troops murdered in Beirut while obeying ROEs that did not permit the inherent right to self defense in the 1980s? Wasn't it American soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines that were murdered throughout the 1990s while most of America ignored it?

Oh, but after 9/11 we should "first accept" that we in the West have a problem with Islam? That'll fix it all right up. You do realize that no amount of Islamic ass kissing will make them change their minds about you, right? You are the Islamic zealot's enemy no matter what you do.

By the way, we already have the solution. Muslims throughout the region are finally doing it before your very eyes.
 
Last edited:
MSgt said:
This is so typical. You pretend that their's no difference between Middle Eastern Sunni Islam and the nice little Muslim man in Iowa.

Why would that be "first of all?" Before 9/11, nobody in America gave Islam a second thought. Of course, before 9/11 Islamic terrorists and zealots had been targetting the West (especially America) since the 1950s. Weren't we designated as the enemy of Islam by Sayyid Qutb before we even supported Israel? Weren't our troops murdered in Beirut while obeying ROEs that did not permit the inherent right to self defense in the 1980s? Wasn't it American soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines that were murdered throughout the 1990s while most of America ignored it?

Oh, but after 9/11 we should "first accept" that we in the West have a problem with Islam? That'll fix it all right up. You do realize that no amount of Islamic ass kissing will make them change their minds about you, right? You are the Islamic zealot's enemy no matter what you do.

By the way, we already have the solution. Muslims throughout the region are finally doing it before your very eyes.
Click to expand...

Assume we wanted to provide economic assistance and were able to achieve some sort of industry building in the ME. What do we do when the next charismatic Imam rolls around and preaches a fiery message about how good people have it, how blessed by Allah they are, and now they need to use that wealth to continue the work of spreading Islam, and establish sharia law around the world, especially to those nations where good Muslims are living under infidel domination?

What do we do to address the cause, not the symptom? Is there a solution that does not mean genocide of one side, or conversion/dhimmitude of the other? Or do we accept that there will be a state of war to varying degrees between Islam and non-Islam for centuries to come?
 
MSgt said:
Hitler burned books. He didn't do anything wrong. No big deal? You don't seem to grasp the damage and destruction that ceremonial book burnings incur.
Click to expand...

Therre is a great deal of difference between an individual burning a book and a government or their representatives burning books. This was not censorship of any sort.

There are unintended consequences to almost everything we do and decide. This rather large piece of **** decided to burn a Qu'ran with absolutely no care for any troop or effort abroad.
Click to expand...

Troops are armed and should be able to protect themselves. If they are unable to protect themselves then the problem lies elsewhere. Members of the Military in Fort Hood were shot and killed and yet there were no Korans being burnt. Instead there was an obvious lack of security and a refusal to look at reality.

I warned people right here on this site last year about this fool's behaviors. The fact that those religious freaks targetted weak UN personnel and not US military personnel shows their depravity. But let's not pretend that there's much of a difference between these Christian zealots and those Islamic zealots. Take away the pampered Disney Land that is America and these book burners would murder you for their twisted sense of God work.
Click to expand...

Why are UN personnel not better protected? This is not the first time they've been attacked by Muslims and yet they still don't seem to have proper security or those protecting them are fearful of firing at the crowds attacking them. All this has nothing to do with a Florida pastor but instead is a diversion from where the real problems lie. The problem is Islam.
Click to expand...
 
ric27 said:
Assume we wanted to provide economic assistance and were able to achieve some sort of industry building in the ME. What do we do when the next charismatic Imam rolls around and preaches a fiery message about how good people have it, how blessed by Allah they are, and now they need to use that wealth to continue the work of spreading Islam, and establish sharia law around the world, especially to those nations where good Muslims are living under infidel domination?

What do we do to address the cause, not the symptom? Is there a solution that does not mean genocide of one side, or conversion/dhimmitude of the other? Or do we accept that there will be a state of war to varying degrees between Islam and non-Islam for centuries to come?
Click to expand...

Be practical. I believe France elected an emperor and Germany elected a dictator, both of which terrorized an entire region through their charisma and preachings. Perhaps we can forgive the probable inevitable temporary zealot in the Middle East as they travel the path of the West? After all, I guarantee that no charismatic Imam will drive the globe into World War.

9/11 was the symptom as is every radical organization throughout the region. The disease (cause) is this failed civilization. It's the lack of proper education, lack of economic and political opportunity (most can't even afford to get married), lack of opportunity for individual and family success, unnatural borders, and political & tribal oppression that drives so many to their local religious freak who claims that Allah has the answers. If we give this civilization the ability to remove these obstacles, which guarantee a path to absolute failure, then we lessen the amount of violence within Islam. Only one form of government has ever been proven to be resilient enough to tackle such problems and produce healthy growth on the economic, social, and religious level.

So the question....."Can democracy work within Islam?" First we have to acknowledge the grand difference between the Muslim government of Indonesia and the Sunni Arab governments of the Middle East (which is also not Iran). Next we should appreciate that Muhammad married Islam to government the moment he made himself his own caeser, which guarantees a struggle to seperate the two. But we also have to acknowledge that the first caliphates were democratically elected by the elders. In the beginning of European colonialism, a strong political movement amongst Muslim Arabs was for democracy. They were denied and the selective balance of power shifted from traditional roles to favored unearned individuals that helped to create the economic disparity that exists today. Then came the "Age of Independence" after World War II. Modernists again sought democracy, but saw this fall to one military coup after another and their Cold War lean determined their preservation. They were again denied. Today, long after the Cold War ended, they are finally erupting from one "country" to the next along the same theme...."democracy."

So we aren't injecting the West into the Middle East or forcing our culture upon them. We are merely facilitating opportunity, after three hundred years of facilitating oppression and tribal strife. Radicalism and terrorism is something they turned to for answers as they designed every and any excuse they could find to legitimize it. It's time to assist their wants for different answers. Worrying about the possible religious zealot that may emerge from this civilization temporarily is unfair. The world doesn't get to emerge from colonialism and dictators into the free democratic world without them. Not anymore. The only alternative is to accept further symptoms of the disease.

And no, none of this had to cost as much as it has. But this is where we need to seperate the effort from the pieces of **** in Washington who are still trying to figure out what's going on.
 
Grant said:
Therre is a great deal of difference between an individual burning a book and a government or their representatives burning books. This was not censorship of any sort.
Click to expand...

It's ceremonial book burning. It doesn't matter why. Nazis burned to censor and to promote nationalism. This failed Christian burned to promote hate. Do you not see how hate is a theme amongst book burners? Let's change the item up. How do you feel when some **** burns the American flag? Just a rag right? That flag burner is trying to incite a reaction. What do you think this piece of **** preacher was doing? And when the murders happen he dares to pretend that he bears no responsibility?

Grant said:
Why are UN personnel not better protected?
Click to expand...

Who cares? Perhaps a European force can find it in themselves to actually be useful and babysit them better.

Grant said:
The problem is Islam.
Click to expand...

The problem is that our troops are largely fighting this regional effort alone while American politicians are finding ways to **** it up and American Christians are burning Qu'rans and protesting at their funerals. With American support like this, how much of Islam's problems become harder and harder to deal with?
 
MSgt said:
Be practical
Click to expand...

I'm so practical....its not even funny

It is not just Islam, MSgt it is the cultures around the world that are Islamic. The Arab nations and cultures vary from Arabia and the middle east across Africa, and they are different from Persian, Pathan, Indonesian, Filipino, etc. Plus the differences between Sunni and Shi'a, and the differences in Sunni Islam itself. Four schools of Islamic jurisprudence, plus "cults" like the Wahabis, etc, etc. At this time, it appears that the Koran and Hadith provide ample latitude for an interpretation that Jihad against unbelievers is a continuing duty for all Muslims.

I think there are 3 basic outcomes outta this mess

A The annihilation of Islam and every Muslim from Mother Earth. Destroy or convert every Muslim man, woman and child, burn their mosques, Korans and every writing.

Aka Wipe them out

B We convert to Islam or die. They win. No more dar el harb, only the dar el Islam

C Accept that there will be a state of war to varying degrees between Islam and non-Islam for centuries to come.

I pick C
 
Grant said:
Therre is a great deal of difference between an individual burning a book and a government or their representatives burning books. This was not censorship of any sort.
Click to expand...
Yes, you and Gardener have been pedalling this idea for some time now. I'd like to know what the difference is. Censorship is when someone wish to prevent or dissuade others from watching, hearing or reading material they deem inappropriate. That is what the Rev and his cohorts were doing with 'Burn the Koran Day'. It makes no difference that they didn't do it officially. Many, many book-burnings (most of those during the Inquisition, for example) were not carried out by the government of the day but by self-appointed moral guardians. It was censorship then and is censorship today.
Click to expand...
 
ric27 said:
I'm so practical....its not even funny
Click to expand...

Nu-uh, I'm so practical it's not even funny.


ric27 said:
It is not just Islam, MSgt it is the cultures around the world that are Islamic. The Arab nations and cultures vary from Arabia and the middle east across Africa, and they are different from Persian, Pathan, Indonesian, Filipino, etc. Plus the differences between Sunni and Shi'a, and the differences in Sunni Islam itself. Four schools of Islamic jurisprudence, plus "cults" like the Wahabis, etc, etc. At this time, it appears that the Koran and Hadith provide ample latitude for an interpretation that Jihad against unbelievers is a continuing duty for all Muslims.
Click to expand...

You are too willing to look at their differences from one nation to the next. It's not that simple to pretend that Libya is only Libya, and Iraq is only Iraq, and Afghanistan is only Afghanistan, and Jordan is only Jordan. The problem here is that these tribes transcend the unnatural borders. For example, and as I'm sure you know, the Kurds are the greatest ethnically concentrated tribe on earth without a nation. They are carved up between Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and Iran. This means that all four countries share a very common theme amongst their people. Transfer this over to the Sunni Arab tribe, which colonized most of the entire region. During the "Age of Independence" they all followed one another into military coup. They all shared the same social problems and religious zealotry for decades. Today, they all once again follow each other down the same theme. This is because not only are they tied religiously, but their individual tribes - underneath Sunni - are carved up amongst the borders.

There are two types of Jihad. 1) A personal struggle for God, which is spiritual and 2) An outward struggle to defend Islam. The latter is the norm and the development of civilization and globalization has twisted and perverted the word down through history. There will probably always be those who need their guarantee into heaven and therefore will always seek the latest Pokemon or "foriegn devil" cultural spread to get it. But the fact is that people who have lives are not so quick to throw them away. If this fact is universal (which it is), then this means that a healthier MENA region means less fanaticism and extremism. And that is the long term security goal of the WOT.



ric27 said:
I think there are 3 basic outcomes outta this mess

A The annihilation of Islam and every Muslim from Mother Earth. Destroy or convert every Muslim man, woman and child, burn their mosques, Korans and every writing.

Aka Wipe them out

B We convert to Islam or die. They win. No more dar el harb, only the dar el Islam

C Accept that there will be a state of war to varying degrees between Islam and non-Islam for centuries to come.

I pick C
Click to expand...

A Samuel Huntington fan? The "Clash of Civilizations" wasn't such a reach because historically that is exactly what civilizations do. They clash. Outcome letter "C" is going to naturally occur. The point is to make it more manageable than it is. But another fact is that our security has always relied upon the health of foriegn regions. An unhealthy north Africa sucked us out to fight the Barbary Pirates Wars to secure our trades through the Med. An unhealthy Europe sucked us into a World War. An unhealthy Pacific sucked us out into the ocean and then an unhealthy Europe sucked us back across the Atlantic. During the Cold War we maintained "stability" in unhealthy regions via the supplied (and sometimes not supplied) dictator. We now have entered the next phase in human history and our next security challenge. The Cold War dictators have long outlived their expiration dates. We have is, yet, another unhealthy region full of religious radicals and extremists amongst a much larger population that want to finally try something healthy to organize their people and gain them opportunity. It's win/win.

Think of it like this. What happens when the oil runs out? You think they'll just roll over and start a new as the wealth of their region jumps ship and defects abroad? The radicalism and extremism of the day is nothing compared to what their miseries will permit then. With Iran seeking the Shia bomb to compete with the Sunni, Jewish, and Indian bomb, we may wind up with basic outcome letter "A." And what good would nuclear holocaust do for the world? No ocean will protect us from that ****.
 
Last edited:
Andalublue said:
Yes, you and Gardener have been pedalling this idea for some time now. I'd like to know what the difference is. Censorship is when someone wish to prevent or dissuade others from watching, hearing or reading material they deem inappropriate. That is what the Rev and his cohorts were doing with 'Burn the Koran Day'. It makes no difference that they didn't do it officially. Many, many book-burnings (most of those during the Inquisition, for example) were not carried out by the government of the day but by self-appointed moral guardians. It was censorship then and is censorship today.
Click to expand...

The theme is a promotion of hate and condemnation. You know, like Jesus taught us.
 
MSgt said:
It's ceremonial book burning. It doesn't matter why.
Click to expand...

Although 'ceremonial' is a rather extravagant word, there is certainly a great deal of symbolism attached. But let's also keep in mind that this was a formerly obscure Florida preacher carrying out this 'ceremony' and not a national government. So why Muslims attacked the UN rather than the man who actually committed the deed makes no sense at all. I suspect these murders were also "ceremonial" or symbolic, and the message, as in earlier messages contained in earlier Muslims riots and murders was, "Don't mess with Islam". That is all they are saying, and this Florida preacher, like the cartoon riots, actually meant very little. They are only showing who's really the boss, and it works. Now you have prominent American politicians and the media suggesting abandoning the First Amendment, just to avoid possible Islamic payback..


Nazis burned to censor and to promote nationalism. This failed Christian burned to promote hate.
Click to expand...

Promote hate? It seems to me he was attempting to point out the more homicidal tendencies of Muslims, and he succeeded beyond anyone's wildest dreams. Certainly we knew Muslims could be psychopathic, which is why there were the warnings, but not many knew that there were no limits to their hatreds. Hunting down innocent and unarmed men and women in the UN compound to murder them? There is no excuse for that, and to blame it on a resident of Florida makes no sense whatsoever.

Do you not see how hate is a theme amongst book burners?
Click to expand...

Sure I do, though their motives might be a little different.
Let's change the item up. How do you feel when some **** burns the American flag? Just a rag right? That flag burner is trying to incite a reaction. What do you think this piece of **** preacher was doing? And when the murders happen he dares to pretend that he bears no responsibility?
Click to expand...

I would think the flag burners are idiots who cannot find a more intelligent way to express themselves. But I wouldn't even raise my voice at such an event much less murder innocent people in a far off country, completely unrelated to the event.

Who cares? Perhaps a European force can find it in themselves to actually be useful and babysit them better.
Click to expand...

Europe will not act until it is too late. In fact that's part of their DNA.

The problem is that our troops are largely fighting this regional effort alone while American politicians are finding ways to **** it up and American Christians are burning Qu'rans and protesting at their funerals. With American support like this, how much of Islam's problems become harder and harder to deal with?
Click to expand...

So what if Americans are rubbishing Muslims? They rubbished the Gerrys and the Japs during WWII but now we are supposed to be silent?? Who put Muslims in charge of free speech and opinion? That's an appointment they appropriated.

We should become harder and harder to deal with ourselves and not give a stuff about their sensitivities. Are we pulling for a win here or a draw? Or are we going to abandon all our rights and freedoms (temporarily) because we're dealing with an enemy who has no compunction in murdering innocents? If we abandon our core principles now, it might be a lot more difficult to get them back in the future.

Let this Florida pastor speak out and consider Voltaire when he said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". Bow to a foreign religion? I don't think that's wise over the long term.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Andalublue said:
Yes, you and Gardener have been pedalling this idea for some time now. I'd like to know what the difference is.
Click to expand...

You don't know the difference between the action of an individual and the action of a government?

Hmmm. Well if I tell my 12 year old son he is grounded for a week it is quite different from the government passing a law that says all 12 year old males are grounded for a week. Does that help?
Censorship is when someone wish to prevent or dissuade others from watching, hearing or reading material they deem inappropriate.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. That's what parents and governments often do.

That is what the Rev and his cohorts were doing with 'Burn the Koran Day'.
Click to expand...

No, they were not. They were not trying to ban the Koran.
It makes no difference that they didn't do it officially.
Click to expand...

But of course it does.
Many, many book-burnings (most of those during the Inquisition, for example) were not carried out by the government of the day but by self-appointed moral guardians. It was censorship then and is censorship today.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that this Florida preacher is the equivalent of the Spanish, or some other, inquisition? Advanced hyperbole doesn't advance your argument whatsoever, In fact it only lends to the ongoing hysteria swirling about an obscure American citizen who used his First Amendment rights.
 
MSgt said:
The theme is a promotion of hate and condemnation. You know, like Jesus taught us.
Click to expand...

Yes, "Go ye forth and slay all of the Muslims, or ye shall have endless war." I'm sure there must be something like that somewhere in the Bible. Either that, or ric is wrong. That couldn't be, could it?
 
Dittohead not! said:
Yes, "Go ye forth and slay all of the Muslims, or ye shall have endless war." I'm sure there must be something like that somewhere in the Bible. Either that, or ric is wrong. That couldn't be, could it?
Click to expand...

It just amazes me. Muhammad was a protestor, phrophet, judge, general, and a soveriegn. Today's Muslims everywhere on the spectrum has a lot of leeway when it comes to living in the example of the prophet. How quickly Christians forget to live in the example of their prophet as they applaud the burning of Qur'ans, seek revenge, and voice for wars.
 
MSgt said:
It just amazes me. Muhammad was a protestor, phrophet, judge, general, and a soveriegn. Today's Muslims everywhere on the spectrum has a lot of leeway when it comes to living in the example of the prophet. How quickly Christians forget to live in the example of their prophet as they applaud the burning of Qur'ans, seek revenge, and voice for wars.
Click to expand...

It could be that there are a lot more people calling themselves Christians than there are actually trying to live the philosophy that Christ preached.
 
MSgt said:
It just amazes me. Muhammad was a protester, phrophet, judge, general, and a soveriegn. Today's Muslims everywhere on the spectrum has a lot of leeway when it comes to living in the example of the prophet. How quickly Christians forget to live in the example of their prophet as they applaud the burning of Qur'ans, seek revenge, and voice for wars.
Click to expand...

Let's not forget he was also a pedophile, a warmonger and wanted to kill those who wouldn't sign on to Islam..

But as to his being 'a prophet', here are some definitions.

1. A person who speaks by divine inspiration or as the interpreter through whom the will of a god is expressed.
2. A person gifted with profound moral insight and exceptional powers of expression.
3. A predictor; a soothsayer.
4. The chief spokesperson of a movement or cause.

I'd give him number 4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom