User Tag List

First 8910

Results 91 to 92 of 92

  1. #91
    Bunnies & Rainbow Socks Kayness's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    9w1 sp/sx


    even though the iranian ministries assured Britain in 1998 that they would do nothing to carry out the fatwa, the bounty on Salman Rushdie's head was increased over this despite his having fuck all to do with the killing.
    9w1 4w5 5w4 sp/sx RCUAI
    art blog

    "I set about seeking a style in the realm of legend. Something that might allow me to give free rein to my juvenile sense of romanticism and the beautiful image"
    - Leni Riefenstahl

  2. #92
    Liberator Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    5w6 sp/sx


    I really don't understand why people have to be insulting and attempt to denigrate members with whom they disagree. It adds nothing but noise to the discussion. I have provided far more evidence and details to back up my position than have you, without wasting my typing on empty namecalling and baseless assertions. You don't make something so just by claiming it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    With a wave of your hand you dismiss these differences because all ideologies can be used to justify violence. You think you're being nuanced, but you're actually being intellectually lazy.

    Another dismissal of the difference between the religions. It's too complex for you to understand, so you want to dismiss whatever suits you. And being a liberal, you fall into false equivalency trap. All cultures are equally valid. All ideologies can be equally violent. Blah blah blah.

    If you're going to make these claims, back them up. Don't make vague assertions and claim your opponent has a "simplistic" view. I've already gone into some detail on my position, but you have done nothing but wave your hands dismissively, claim things are "complex", then claim my view is simplistic.

    Incidentally, I would agree that there are more to the religions than what is written in the Bible, Quran, and Hadith. But those other influences change over time, while the holy books do not. Religions go through cycles, which inevitably includes a revival of fundamentalism (believing in literal interpretations of holy books, whether it's the year 1200 or 2012).
    Either you agree that all religions (and I mean religion here, not ideology) can be used to justify violence, or you do not. If you do, than the differences among them are more a matter of degree, or even of opportunism than of substance. You claim that my observation that there is more to a religion than its scriptures is simplistic, then agree with exactly that in your last paragraph. Finally you attempt to label my political perspective, even though you have far too little information to do so; and put words in my mouth that I have not used. All RELIGIONS are equally valid, but all CULTURES are not. The degree to which a religion is used to promote violence depends strongly on the culture to which it is tied. Yes, the two influence each other. A "peaceful" religion in the hands of a violent culture, or simply a repressive political system, can be used to justify all manner of violence and oppression.

    You are correct that scripture doesn't change, while other factors do. This is crucial. One of the main factors that does change is how people view the unchanging scripture. The term "coming of age" has been used by several people to describe the evolution of Christianity from the renaissance to the present day; and by extension, to a similar change that might occur in Islam. I see part of that coming of age as a shift from literal to figurative interpretation of holy books. Yes, there are cycles, and factions, and plenty of Christians who are quite fundamentalist about the Bible. The literal interpretation seems to be more common among Muslims, though. If (as) more of them come to put it in context and understand its figurative value, there will be a sea change in Islam.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    This is nonsense and your "history lesson" is completely unnecessary. This doesn't even deserve a response because you're off on such an irrelevant tangent, I don't think you can find your way back.
    If you had learned this history lesson, you would not have made such an inaccurate claim about the relative state of development of western and Islamic culture when Christianity was coming of age. It may be a tangent, but you brought it up, and it indicates either sloppy discussion, or an actual lack of knowledge. It also is symptomatic of the western attitude that we are (and always have been) "better than" the Muslims/Arabs/Africans etc. I like to think this attitude is based more in ignorance than malice, but I could be wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Here's the thing, if Europeans had access to nuclear weapons in the 13th century, humans might be extinct. Thankfully they didn't. Unfortunately, it is possible for a Muslim with a world view comparable to a 13th century European to get his or her hands on a nuclear weapon. I don't think this threat is nearly as immediate as Republican war hawks would have us believe, but it cannot be ignored. Your political correctness alarms are probably going bonkers now.

    What the US detonating the first nuclear weapon has to do with all of this, I don't know. I'll just write it off as another "history lesson".

    Please, you're doing the exact opposite of what you claim. You're dismissing concrete differences in the ideologies with a wave of you hand, then getting on a soapbox and proclaiming that I am the one doesn't understand the complexity. But hey, let's throw something vague in there about "modern communication" to make it sound like you've actually put some thought into this issue. Right?
    Let's mention modern communications because it is relevant. Weapons technology is not the only thing that has changed in 600 years. To focus on one and ignore the other is unrealistic and unproductive. A big challenge always facing resistance movements, splinter groups, rebels, etc. is communication among themselves, and getting publicity for their message. Modern technology makes this much easier than it was in the middle ages. Yes, the fanatics get to use it, too, but they and their supporters do not have the virtual monopoly on public discourse that the Christian church and its governments had.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

Similar Threads

  1. Teach us how to use your two top functions!
    By Azure Flame in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: 02-22-2014, 12:02 AM
  2. Iranian plot to murder Saudi ambassador in the US
    By JAVO in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 10-13-2011, 06:39 PM
  3. Does This Forum Teach Us How To Think?
    By highlander in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 06-18-2010, 05:44 PM
  4. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 11-27-2008, 01:20 PM
  5. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 04-20-2008, 07:22 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO