Were clothes behind attack on teenager? Hijab

reply to post by centurion1211


What about planned parenthood clinic bombings?

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
People can call themselves whatever they want, it doesn't necessarily mean they live by it.

A bit off-topic but relevant to your post Raso.

I'll say ... Maybe not even in the same universe as the topic.

I recall growing up in the Catholic church. Every Sunday, without fail, there were the same folks who would take Communion and proceed directly out the doors of the church. The mass was over within a few minutes, and they were always the same ones you'd see walking down the street, 'round the corner, and straight into the American Legion. Eh? It opened at 12:00. Odd that several of these folks would be the first to denounce others' faith and spout-off as to how "devout" they were. yeahright.

And going out for a drink after church somehow compares to killing your own flesh and blood because you don't like the way they dress exactly how? Is going out for a drink against any secular or church law? Because killing someone is definately against both (at least for Christians).

In regards to the topic of discussion, there are good, bad and ugly in all walks, ways, and or religions. The sad part being one need not look too far to "see" them.

Like right here on ATS when someone tries to equate drinking after church with killing your own daughter.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
reply to post by centurion1211

 

What about planned parenthood clinic bombings?

That is the standard response and the closest anyone can come in the U.S. to this kind of thing.

When was the last one of those anyway? And what happened to the person that did it? As I recall, they got prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law instead of having a bunch of people make excuses for them like, "well, it's part of their culture or religion".

I also don't recall any demonstrations by U.S. citizens demanding that the bomber be freed for exercising their religious beliefs either.

Still can't see that there really is no "equating" between what "a very, very few" Christians do and "some - a large number it seems" muslims do?

None are so blind as those who will not see ...

[edit on 12/11/2007 by centurion1211]

just to stir the pot (that is what I seem to be good at doing at this point in time)
I wanted to interject my opinion on this particular topic. While I don't believe in cultural enforcement; especially to the extent of death/murder, I could definitely see a need for this in our culture. NOT just for women... Men should have them too.

How good would it be for our society if people STOPPED basing their judgments on their sexual appeal to a person, and based it on the persons personality, skills, and interests? Anyone see a challenge in that which our (USA) country needs most? Maybe if we followed this route we could divulge from the 'Idiocracy' path me are on and head back to a thoughtful society.


just my $.02 cents...

Originally posted by bodrul
also your friend is right its a cultral thing and about modesty

First of all, are you sure? It is in the Koran, is it not? I know Arabs did it before Islam but I was under the impression it was incorporated into the religion.

Secondly, I know what it's about, and your pretty much right, it's so men are not "distracted"...

If men had to wear it too, I would not have a problem with it.

And while I believe that he did act wrong in the religious sense by KILLING her because of it, and the Koran does not enforce the murder punishment for not wearing it (it doesn't state any punishment as far as I know) the very fact that he enforced a sexist rule should be enough to invoke criticism...seriously...even if they don't murder...

It's like once it's religion it's okay...unless it's Christianity, thats how liberals think (not addressed at Bodrul but the other non-Muslims defending his opinion).


[edit on 12/11/2007 by Kacen]

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
People can call themselves whatever they want, it doesn't necessarily mean they live by it.

Like right here on ATS when someone tries to equate drinking after church with killing your own daughter.

bold emphasis mine

How about addressing such in the context it was posted, as opposed to distorting it for whatever means serve your purpose. (?)

At NO point did I directly nor indirectly compare the two... simply an observation as to how So many "say one thing and do another". Okay!?

*sheesh*

 

reply to post by 12m8keall2c


I've re-read your original post a couple times and I stand by my original interpretation of it and my response to it. It was simply another (yawn) attempt to try and soften the image of what "some" barbaric muslims do by trying to equate those actions with some anecdotal Christian actions.

Though tried seemingly thousands of times, that premise never really works.

So, are you now trying to back away from what was your original meaning? You created a comparison - direct or indirect - by posting those comments on this thread and the wording you used.

[edit on 12/11/2007 by centurion1211]

reply to post by traderonwallst


I'm just glad that 'Trader' has another string to his bow other than claiming Global Warming is the creation of Pinko,Democrat, hippy, brown rice eating environmentalists. A bit of Islamophobia balnces things up nicely. I wonder, Is there a pattern emerging here?

Originally posted by Fang
reply to post by traderonwallst

 

I'm just glad that 'Trader' has another string to his bow other than claiming Global Warming is the creation of Pinko,Democrat, hippy, brown rice eating environmentalists. A bit of Islamophobia balnces things up nicely. I wonder, Is there a pattern emerging here?

Yes, there is a pattern.

It exists in the words of the people that post in opposition to the OP. Here we have a perfect example: going straight to name calling for lack of any thoughtful response.

Double post deleted.

[edit on 07/21/06 by Fang]

reply to post by centurion1211


There's a bit of back history here and if you think thats name calling, you haven't lived.

Originally posted by centurion1211

So, are you now trying to back away from what was your original meaning? You created a comparison - direct or indirect - by posting those comments on this thread and the wording you used.

Not in the least.

My "original meaning" was nothing more than that which I posted. So many say one thing yet do another. Nothing more, nothing less. If you Choose to color my comments with Your personal perceptions and or interpretations, so be it. It seems rather obvious that you have no intention of considering that you've taken them entirely out of context, and that you've also Created a comparison where none existed in the first place.

 

reply to post by traderonwallst

They're all supposed to be peaceful
People find plenty of excuses in them to kill though, and not just in Islam.

Just ask Giordano Bruno... or for that matter Alice Hawthorne.

This kind of "honor killing" is not exclusive to Islam either, it's common in strongly patriarchal cultures in the Christian world as well, notably in Central and South America, though a crackdown there since the 1990's has made it less common.

Shame on all of you

For daring to try to shed light and correct traderonwallst dearly held sterotypes and prejudices against Middle East culture, religion, heck people there in general.

And how dare you try to knock down the carefull crafted Strawman he labored to put forth.

Let ignore the fact that the color of you skin can get you killed in many parts of the US. Or the wrong christian religion can get you run out of some small comunities here in the US, forget that how many untold millions of million of people in the Middle East go about thier day to day lives much like people say in the US or the UK.

This type of ignorant bigotism is sad when you realize many are infected with it

reply to post by FredT


Or should we say shame on you ...

For attacking the messenger, and not the message?

For attempting to use the tired, old deflection of pretending that the OP was referring to "all" people of the middle east, when quite clearly he was only referring to the barabaric acts of "some" specific muslims in canada?

For attempting to make what happened in canada somehow appear OK, because of some anecdotal events in the U.S.?

And quite clearly, the use of the "religion of peace" slogan by the OP was a poke at all those (here and elsewhere) that have previously tried to smokescreen these barbaric actions by "some" muslims by hiding behind that exact same "religion of peace" slogan.

You don't get to have it both ways ...

[edit on 12/11/2007 by centurion1211]

reply to post by centurion1211


I understand where you're coming from, bit perhaps fredT was being facetious.

You know - sarcasm, irony, that kind of thing.

reply to post by centurion1211


One would have to be blind indeed to miss the fact that there has been a concerted, consistent, and ongoing campaign to stir up hatred of Muslims - and not just the particular Muslims involved in these events, but the Islamic faith as a whole. Those involved in this effort have a multitude of different agendas, but all find it politically advantageous to mine post-911 animosities towards Muslims.

A common way to do this is to post some story of some backward and barbaric act by some Muslim or group of Muslims, and hint obliquely that everyone knows that this supposed "religion of peace" (you can almost hear the sneer when they type the line) is in fact a menace that must be wiped out - even if it's not PC to actually come out and say it.

There is no doubt there is plenty of backwardness and brutality in the Islamic world, however this is true of the world as a whole. No religion is immune to it - indeed neither are many non-religious ideologies.

It's a problem common to the human species. Not solely, or primarily, Islam.

Of course it is a cultural aspect that is very much a part of islam, as is beheadings, terrorism, child abuse, female degradation, and so forth. The entire history of islam is based on murder and pillaging. The founder, mohammed, was a pedophile, a war monger and a pillager who endorsed genocide of anyone who was not muslim or as most muslims would label us (infidels, kafirs, etc) whatever. Islam is detrimental to any western society and that's why the so called 'culture' it introduces into them is seen with disappointment. Western societies have laws that islam has no regard for, and honor killings is just one of many.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by laiguana]

Originally posted by laiguana
Of course it is a cultural aspect that is very much a part of islam, as is beheadings, terrorism, child abuse, female degradation, and so forth. The entire history of islam is based on murder and pillaging. The founder, mohammed, was a pedophile, a war monger and a pillager who endorsed genocide of anyone who was not muslim or as most muslims would label us (infidels, kafirs, etc) whatever. Islam is detrimental to any western society and that's why the so called 'culture' it introduces into them is seen with disappointment. Western societies have laws that islam has no regard for, and honor killings is just one of many.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by laiguana]

You know I'm not fond of Islam but I know when something is a gross generalization.

To be honest no need to make up harsh generalizations to demonize Islam, no more than you need to make up stuff about Christianity...I dislike them just the way they are, but I won't hate someone just because they are a member of a particular religion...unless it's Scientology...or Christian Identity...some bull like that...

reply to post by Kacen


You do realize that generalizations are made in everyday life, right?... Statistics, calculations, estimates/conjectures based on factual data, etc.... are always full of generalizations, right? Generalizations are more accurate then you think, because it gives you a solid understanding of the scope you are attempting to define. Example: not all muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are muslim.