• 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Pakistan army called on to stop 'blasphemy' clashes in Islamabad

D_NATURED said:
Christianity has every ounce the bloody potential of Islam. What keeps them "honest" today is our secular democracy. Americans don't have to fear being murdered when they criticize Christianity in the same way that Muslims abroad do. Muslim culture never had an enlightenment. The average Muslim sees no distinction between faith and politics. Islam instructs their politics as much as their religious behavior.

Frankly, I'm disgusted that ANY of these ancient superstitions have survived to create such disharmony among modern people. If I had my way, they would ALL be challenged to prove they aren't obstructing human intellectual and cultural progress before they could operate tax free.

In a sense, the enlightenment value of "believe whatever crazy **** you like" has left the door open to zealots of all flavors. For too long it has been considered taboo to mention that invisible sky men are just make believe. I'm not even looking to have that fight, though. I would, however, like to see the faithful begin to respect ME enough not to ask me to believe absolutely anything without evidence. No matter what choice THEY make, I don't want to have reality poisoned by their fantasies. What needs to change for the face of faith to become less stupid is for everyone, faithful and faithless alike, to demand it not just for the other guy.

So far, introspection remains lost on those entitled to believe.
Click to expand...


I agree. A religious perceptual perceptual reality was used to replace a spiritual perceptual reality. In my view, humanity really went astray with this notion of a male dominator god.
 
stevecanuck said:
The fact that Christians acted badly is NOT is doubt. I still don't have the time to properly answer you, but I ask you to consider one thing, and that's to compare the examples set by Mohamed and Jesus. Therein lies the difference.
Click to expand...

I think your point would carry more water if we didn't already have two thousand years of clear evidence that contradicts it. Regardless of what any interpretation of the bible says, Chriistians have had no difficulty finding sufficient justification for murder, slavery and oppression. Conversely, many Muslims have found inspiration for charity in the Koran. I can't blame a book, either way, for what people do. Yes, they are reading crap but, at the end of the day, the real problem is that they choose to view the world through a magical lens.

Magic is a conversation stopper and no matter what is being claimed as magic, there is no room for or ability of logical arguments to prevail. Violence is the predictable result of beliefs that can't be defended rhetorically, no matter how nicey-nice they sound on paper.
 
D_NATURED said:
I think your point would carry more water if we didn't already have two thousand years of clear evidence that contradicts it. Regardless of what any interpretation of the bible says, Chriistians have had no difficulty finding sufficient justification for murder, slavery and oppression. Conversely, many Muslims have found inspiration for charity in the Koran. I can't blame a book, either way, for what people do. Yes, they are reading crap but, at the end of the day, the real problem is that they choose to view the world through a magical lens.

Magic is a conversation stopper and no matter what is being claimed as magic, there is no room for or ability of logical arguments to prevail. Violence is the predictable result of beliefs that can't be defended rhetorically, no matter how nicey-nice they sound on paper.
Click to expand...

I'm on my way out, so this is just going to be another drive-by. Sorry about that. You're missing my point entirely. I'm trying to talk about the religion itself. What does Islam tell it's followers, while you're responding with historical references, and equating actions with teachings. I will probably make a separate thread on this eventually. I hope you see the difference. Gotta go.
 
stevecanuck said:
I'm on my way out, so this is just going to be another drive-by. Sorry about that. You're missing my point entirely. I'm trying to talk about the religion itself. What does Islam tell it's followers, while you're responding with historical references, and equating actions with teachings. I will probably make a separate thread on this eventually. I hope you see the difference. Gotta go.
Click to expand...

OK, it's like you have two ice picks. One has the word "love" written on it and the other the word "hate". Are you MORE surprised when the love ice pick is used to stab you, when you know damn well it's been used before to stab others? What difference do the words make NOW when they never have made a difference? Whether you are stabbed in the name of love or stabbed in the name of hate, the blood flow is equivalent and that's where the legitimate complaint lies.

Hopefully, when you start your new thread you do a better job of explaining why the hate ice pick is worse. I'm still not seeing it.
 
D_NATURED said:
OK, it's like you have two ice picks. One has the word "love" written on it and the other the word "hate". Are you MORE surprised when the love ice pick is used to stab you, when you know damn well it's been used before to stab others? What difference do the words make NOW when they never have made a difference? Whether you are stabbed in the name of love or stabbed in the name of hate, the blood flow is equivalent and that's where the legitimate complaint lies.

Hopefully, when you start your new thread you do a better job of explaining why the hate ice pick is worse. I'm still not seeing it.
Click to expand...

The "love" pick is being used contrary to its purpose as stated in the owner's manual. ALL blame for it's misuse falls on the user. The "hate" pick is being used per the instruction manual. Blame has to be shared by the inventor, suppler, training staff, and manufacturer as well as the user.
 
stevecanuck said:
The "love" pick is being used contrary to its purpose as stated in the owner's manual. ALL blame for it's misuse falls on the user. The "hate" pick is being used per the instruction manual. Blame has to be shared by the inventor, suppler, training staff, and manufacturer as well as the user.
Click to expand...

You can't just put the word "love" on a chainsaw and be surprised when the users still cut their arm off. There is no way to love with a chainsaw. Religious magical thinking, regardless of their PR firm, is a tool that is dangerous. The words are just words, the usefulness is in its ability, ultimately, to excuse bad actions, not good ones. Good things need NO excuse.

The comfort it provides is paid for at a high price to civility and human potential.
 
D_NATURED said:
You can't just put the word "love" on a chainsaw and be surprised when the users still cut their arm off. There is no way to love with a chainsaw.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you can use it to build a log cabin for a homeless person.

But, I'm not going to play analogy anymore.

Religious magical thinking, regardless of their PR firm, is a tool that is dangerous. The words are just words, the usefulness is in its ability, ultimately, to excuse bad actions, not good ones. Good things need NO excuse.

The comfort it provides is paid for at a high price to civility and human potential.
Click to expand...

You've said that Christianity has exactly the same potential to create terrorists as Islam. That's absurd. I asked you to consider the 180 degree difference between Mohamed and Jesus. You didn't.
 
stevecanuck said:
Yeah, you can use it to build a log cabin for a homeless person.

But, I'm not going to play analogy anymore.



You've said that Christianity has exactly the same potential to create terrorists as Islam. That's absurd. I asked you to consider the 180 degree difference between Mohamed and Jesus. You didn't.
Click to expand...

I did consider your opinion, I just disagree. Objectively, the history of Christianity is bloody as ****. If it weren't, your argument would hold more water.

I will concede, though, that modern Islam is comprised of fewer moderates than modern, American christianity. I don't, however, believe that has anything to do with the words of the bible. It has more to do with the words of our constitution. The first amendment made religion a subset of nationality, not the reverse. When it ceased to be a way to define a person politically, it ceased to be an excuse for murder.

Islam continues to be as much a political identity as much as a spiritual one. When the middle east becomes secular, it will mark their own point of divergence. The scary thing is that many American christians still desire to make their Jesus a political force again. Those like you and I must remain vigilant and never believe it has lost its potential to be a very bloody world view.
 
D_NATURED said:
I did consider your opinion, I just disagree. Objectively, the history of Christianity is bloody as ****. If it weren't, your argument would hold more water.

I will concede, though, that modern Islam is comprised of fewer moderates than modern, American christianity. I don't, however, believe that has anything to do with the words of the bible. It has more to do with the words of our constitution. The first amendment made religion a subset of nationality, not the reverse. When it ceased to be a way to define a person politically, it ceased to be an excuse for murder.

Islam continues to be as much a political identity as much as a spiritual one. When the middle east becomes secular, it will mark their own point of divergence. The scary thing is that many American christians still desire to make their Jesus a political force again. Those like you and I must remain vigilant and never believe it has lost its potential to be a very bloody world view.
Click to expand...

You did NOT consider it. Look at your second sentence. It goes back to history, and COMPLETELY blows off the comparison between Mohamed and Jesus.
 
D_NATURED said:
I don't, however, believe that has anything to do with the words of the bible. It has more to do with the words of our constitution. The first amendment made religion a subset of nationality, not the reverse. When it ceased to be a way to define a person politically, it ceased to be an excuse for murder.
Click to expand...

I didn't think of that. It's no wonder that other Christian countries that do not operate under the American constitution continue to burn witches.
 
D_NATURED said:
Islam continues to be as much a political identity as much as a spiritual one.
Click to expand...

Their religion and politics are the same thing, and come from the same source. If nobody has before coined the word religitics, then I hereby claim copyright priviliges.

When the middle east becomes secular, it will mark their own point of divergence.
Click to expand...

Islam is in the middle of a great resurgence. Secular is the last thing the ME is getting.

. The scary thing is that many American christians still desire to make their Jesus a political force again. Those like you and I must remain vigilant and never believe it has lost its potential to be a very bloody world view.
Click to expand...

There are those who want it be a political force (mostly in the U.S.), but the days of it being a bloody world view are well in the rear view mirror.
 
stevecanuck said:
You did NOT consider it. Look at your second sentence. It goes back to history, and COMPLETELY blows off the comparison between Mohamed and Jesus.
Click to expand...

You asked me to compare the "180 degree" difference between Jesus and Muhammad. Those are both historical figures so I think it's fair to go back to history. What you seem to want me to agree to is that the peaceful, lovey-dovey Jesus religion is different than the violent, oppressive Muhammad religion. I agree that they are different characters in different books but, honestly, you don't have to go back to the middle ages to see where Christianity has been oppressive and violent too.

The NAZIs wore belt buckles that said "Got mit uns", which does not refer to the Muslim god and it wasn't ceremonial deism. I must disagree with you. As role models, both characters fail and if you think Jesus belief is a step up from Islam, you're welcome to your opinion. However, plenty of murder and oppression HAVE been the legacy of both faiths and that is not arguable. Defining a two thousand year old religion by the last fifty years is like bragging that the last two inches of the dagger don't hurt any extra.
 
stevecanuck said:
I didn't think of that. It's no wonder that other Christian countries that do not operate under the American constitution continue to burn witches.
Click to expand...

Where there is a secular society elsewhere, as created by the founding document, the result is no different. You know what I'm saying, you're just being obtuse because you don't recognize the Christian faith as being a volatile powder keg. That's a dangerous brand of naiveté that you are welcome to, though.
 
stevecanuck said:
Their religion and politics are the same thing, and come from the same source. If nobody has before coined the word religitics, then I hereby claim copyright priviliges.
Click to expand...

It's not politics until it's free of religious influence. Until then, it's just religion. As long as magical thinking can arbitrarily re-define the issues, there is no place for a rational government for the people. In that sense, Trump represents a sort of Libertarian theocracy where the facts and even disagreeable words can be stricken from history. As with any other religion, reality must bend to the gravity of their free market fantasy.



Islam is in the middle of a great resurgence. Secular is the last thing the ME is getting.
Click to expand...

Well, change seems to rise up and boil over quickly. Perhaps the pressures of a shrinking planet and the conspicuous lifestyle imbalance of the secular world will ultimately be a catalyst for people to abandon their traditions of violence.



There are those who want it be a political force (mostly in the U.S.), but the days of it being a bloody world view are well in the rear view mirror.
Click to expand...

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better. I can't disagree enough that there is nothing to be concerned about. Christian extremism is alive and well.
 
D_NATURED said:
You asked me to compare the "180 degree" difference between Jesus and Muhammad. Those are both historical figures so I think it's fair to go back to history. What you seem to want me to agree to is that the peaceful, lovey-dovey Jesus religion is different than the violent, oppressive Muhammad religion. I agree that they are different characters in different books but, honestly, you don't have to go back to the middle ages to see where Christianity has been oppressive and violent too.

The NAZIs wore belt buckles that said "Got mit uns", which does not refer to the Muslim god and it wasn't ceremonial deism. I must disagree with you. As role models, both characters fail and if you think Jesus belief is a step up from Islam, you're welcome to your opinion. However, plenty of murder and oppression HAVE been the legacy of both faiths and that is not arguable. Defining a two thousand year old religion by the last fifty years is like bragging that the last two inches of the dagger don't hurt any extra.
Click to expand...

More of the same cop-out. You keep talking about the actions of those who claim to be Christian, and have yet to recognize the polar opposites of the two role models that followers are supposed to emulate.

One made war, the other made peace.
One taught vengence, the other taught forgiveness.
One had people killed, the other healed.
One kept sex slaves, the other didn't.
One divided the world into two warring camps, the other authored the golden rule.

So, yes the difference is 180 degrees, and more and more Muslims are harking back to the times and ways of Mohamed, while more and more Christians are ignoring the **** in the OT and trying to live by the NT.

What did I get wrong?
 
stevecanuck said:
More of the same cop-out. You keep talking about the actions of those who claim to be Christian, and have yet to recognize the polar opposites of the two role models that followers are supposed to emulate.

One made war, the other made peace.
One taught vengence, the other taught forgiveness.
One had people killed, the other healed.
One kept sex slaves, the other didn't.
One divided the world into two warring camps, the other authored the golden rule.

So, yes the difference is 180 degrees, and more and more Muslims are harking back to the times and ways of Mohamed, while more and more Christians are ignoring the **** in the OT and trying to live by the NT.

What did I get wrong?
Click to expand...

They're just literary characters, nothing else. The truth is, christianity embedded itself in every brutal aristocracy in Europe for centuries, all at the same time. As they fought each other, the nobles were patronized by the church and the peasants were slaughtered intermittently for their entertainment. There is NO high ground in claiming that Jesus was a peace-nick when his followers have been war-obsessed or that Muhammad was a slave owner when christians were slave owners too. . The example of Jesus has never been followed so talking about who he was is irrelevant to our modern world.

That's what you get wrong, your understanding of where Mr holy britches has gotten us. It wasn't until we agreed NOT to make religion the most important thing that we learned to live more peacefully with each other. If Muslims do the same, they'll have a similar result.
 
D_NATURED said:
They're just literary characters, nothing else. The truth is, christianity embedded itself in every brutal aristocracy in Europe for centuries, all at the same time. As they fought each other, the nobles were patronized by the church and the peasants were slaughtered intermittently for their entertainment. There is NO high ground in claiming that Jesus was a peace-nick when his followers have been war-obsessed or that Muhammad was a slave owner when christians were slave owners too. . The example of Jesus has never been followed so talking about who he was is irrelevant to our modern world.

That's what you get wrong, your understanding of where Mr holy britches has gotten us. It wasn't until we agreed NOT to make religion the most important thing that we learned to live more peacefully with each other. If Muslims do the same, they'll have a similar result.
Click to expand...

"Just literary characters"???? That's almost too absurd for words, so all I can do is simply repeat (for the final time) that those two "literary characters" are supposed to set the example that defines their religion. You know that, yet you try to pass it off as irrelevant. Absurd. Anyway, enjoy the final word, cuz you have the floor. Bye.
 
stevecanuck said:
"Just literary characters"???? That's almost too absurd for words, so all I can do is simply repeat (for the final time) that those two "literary characters" are supposed to set the example that defines their religion. You know that, yet you try to pass it off as irrelevant. Absurd. Anyway, enjoy the final word, cuz you have the floor. Bye.
Click to expand...

Dude, we're two vegetarians arguing about which brand of bacon is worse for you. In the end, we agree that they both are not healthy. That's the important thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom