Just to put a fork in this, those are YOUR words.Originally Posted by Evilroddy
Other than the obligatory "out of context" (as I explained, context only makes it worse), the above is what I've been saying all along - violent jihad comes directly from reading the words of God and then deciding to obey them as close to the letter as possible (as did Mohamed - you know, the perfect example of a Muslim).
We have nothing much to argue about.
- See something, say something, get called an Islamophobe.
- The absence of hostilities does not prove the absence of hostility.
- Legitimate criticism is neither hate speech, phobic, nor incitement to commit violence.
- I choose my words very, very, VERY carefully. - Jordan Peterson.
Stevecanuck:
We are arguing about time and anachronism. Using literal interpretations of ancient holy books without nuance and "context" is not what 99.9% of Muslims do. You are making a case that Islam is dangerous based on the behaviours of a small minority of fundamentalist and fanatical militants. That same methodology could be used to falsely prove that Christianity, Judaism, Capitalism, Democracy, Public Education, friendship or even love are dangerous positions, due to the behaviour of fringe minorities within those groups.
You are however right about having nothing to debate about, because I will never agree with your methodology and conclusions and you are likely to do likewise with my argumentation. So why bang our heads against the walls? We may agree to disagree or we can we chase each other in fruitless circular argument. I prefer the former.
Cheers.
Evilroddy.
"At the heart of quantum mechanics is a rule that sometimes governs politicians or CEOs - as long as no one is watching, anything goes.”
― Lawrence M. Krauss
Sorry, mate. Yer talkin out yer ass. I'm making the case that Islam is dangerous based on the behaviors of those who read and obey. Words like "anachronism", "interpretations", and "nuance" mean nothing to those who read, "Slay them where you find them". All they know or care about is what God tells them. Period.
- See something, say something, get called an Islamophobe.
- The absence of hostilities does not prove the absence of hostility.
- Legitimate criticism is neither hate speech, phobic, nor incitement to commit violence.
- I choose my words very, very, VERY carefully. - Jordan Peterson.
You know, we can boil this all down to one simple question:
Do Islamic extremists commit acts of terrorism based on God's commands as written in the Qur'an or not?
- See something, say something, get called an Islamophobe.
- The absence of hostilities does not prove the absence of hostility.
- Legitimate criticism is neither hate speech, phobic, nor incitement to commit violence.
- I choose my words very, very, VERY carefully. - Jordan Peterson.
Here's how to make an Islamic terrorist:
1. Convince them, if they don't already believe it, that God was very serious about the words that appear in the Qur'an. They are NOT suggestions.
2. Repeatedly read verse like these to them:
- 2:216 "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not".
- 4:95 - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home)".
3. Point them at a target.
- See something, say something, get called an Islamophobe.
- The absence of hostilities does not prove the absence of hostility.
- Legitimate criticism is neither hate speech, phobic, nor incitement to commit violence.
- I choose my words very, very, VERY carefully. - Jordan Peterson.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote