It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'Intolerant' Christians are more militant than Muslims, says equality chief

page: 11
27
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


while for me the religion of Submission, or any religion at all, for that matter, has no attraction at all.

your refusal to acknowledge past atrocities is nothing more than
sweeping it under the rug/condoning it

dude if i were you

i'd go find a medicine person or go on a vision quest,

to find that missing half of your spirit

cause you certainly sound like a jingoist and not of the native type.

some friendly advice from a shamanist.

take it as you will and if that pisses you you off then ask yourself why before replying.

:shk:




posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by BattleFieldPredator
 





I was there, and have been back a few times since.. It was no crusade None of the people under me wore St George crosses on their combats, nor did we, or have we wore Knights Templar regalia at anytime! I would not allow it..


i'm assuming this part is yours [you should preview before replying, just saying]

so there were st george's and templar crosses being used, ehh?

ATS search is your friend you know there's a thread about that here by the way
and judging a whole war by what happened to your unit...



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by edog11
 


dude don't waste your Sharingan


notice how the previous posters comment on revisionists literally flew over his head.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 06:54 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bluebelle

Originally posted by Soldier of God

We have a God that doesn't require bloodshed. Once Jesus was crucified that all ended.


Debateable. This blog entry from a few months back gives a run down of the 'not so nice' bible verses that advocate murder. Believe the number there is around 50?


No it is not debateable. If anyone says otherwise they are not following God's law they are following man's.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Chevalerous
 


STAR 4 U!

now that, folks is denying ignorance.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 09:14 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soldier of God
No it is not debateable. If anyone says otherwise they are not following God's law they are following man's.


Or simply interpreting that some old testament laws do still apply, specifically the one's that require death for a variety of random offences.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 01:42 AM
link   
Couple of brief points, for both sides of the debate to consider.

1) Islam is a political-religious system. There is no distinction in Islam between religion and the state. The two are one and the same - hence the concept of Dar Al Islam, and the use of Sharia.

2) Christianity is *not* a political religious system. Places where Christianity has been used as a political system (see John Calvin's Geneva) have essentially been models in how to create a failed system. It doesn't work; and for simple reasons. Like Jesus said "My Kingdom is not of this world". Christianity is not a mirror image of Judaism; it is not centred around a colour, race or creed, but around Christ. And in Him, "there is neither Jew nor Greek, Barbarian or Scythian, slave or free."

Much of the misunderstanding between Islam and the West stems from this vital distinction. Muslims often assume that because their system is a political-religious system, that likewise the West, being based on Judeo-Christian principles, must be "Christian". This is not the case.


REGARDING THE CRUSADES:

It is important to note that when the Crusades occured, the push from the (Catholic) church was an attempt at curbing the encroachment of Islamism upon (predominantly Christian, in what *was* at the time an attempt at a political-religious Christian system) Europe. Revisionist history tells us that the Crusaders perpetrated horrific deeds without provocation. This is simply untrue, and a horrible miscarriage of historical scholarship. And while I don't necessarily support or approve of the Crusades (or what went on during those Crusades), I do understand the geopolitical motivation behind what was done.

When it comes to "Christian" input into the Crusades, Christians often respond by saying "those people weren't Christian at all" or "it was the Catholic church, not my church". While there is *some* truth to this, it also appears to me to be an all-too-convenient "out" for people who don't want to be painted with the same brush.

A more accurate statement would be to say that, while yes, the church played a vital role in the Crusades, it is worth noting that during the period in question, laypersons (i.e. anyone NOT part of the clergy) were not permitted to read or have access to the Scriptures. AT ALL. So while today's Christian can turn back to the Bible and look for guidance or direction, the 11th Century Christian had no such opportunity. They simply had to assume that what was taught from the pulpit was God's own revelation, when clearly at many times throughout history (e.g indulgences, confession, "limbo" etc.) what was being taught was extrabiblical and not in the spirit or letter of God's Word.

Now, with those things clarified...

continue



edit on 21-6-2011 by Awen24 because: left a few words out in a sentence, edited.



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by BattleFieldPredator
 



They are NOT Christians..


You could say the same thing about 'muslim' terrorists.

What would you say on the subject of protestant-catholic violence in Northern Ireland? That is without doubt religiously motivated violence; the kids over there are segregated from a very early age, made to attend separate schools and taught to hate people because they believe a slightly different denomination.



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 06:47 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Basically you would have to go back over a century to find aggression on the part of Christians, committing terrorist acts. Yeah, the Irish did practice terrorism, but it wasn't due to religion, but due to a long ongoing war against England, that had been going on for centuries. Oh, and occasionally we do see what could be called terrorist acts against abortion clinics, because there are some radical Christian groups who see it as murder (tough subject). These extremely few acts of terrorism by Christians are extremely small in number compared to the regular acts of terrorism committed by Muslims.

What you don't see are honor killings, horrible treatment of women, child sex slavery, complete disregard for western rights, gang rapes of local women, harassment of women who do not meet their dress codes, and on and on. While radical elements of Christianity can be a pain, they are no where near as violent, or cruel as the Muslim religion.

Who ever this equality chief is, he should be forced to resign after such a comment.

What is evident, is that there is not compromise with Islam. Their approach to peace, or cease fires, is to wait for their next opportunity to attack.

edit on 21-6-2011 by poet1b because: change there to their



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 



The headscarf is none of our business. It is their religion.


Not when Muslim men start harassing non-Muslim women for not meeting their dress codes. Then it becomes a problem for everyone.

When Muslim boys start calling non-Muslim women whores, and Muslim are involved with high crime rates of raping non-Muslim women, then it becomes a problem for everyone.

I don't see how you can get more militant than this, without going into a situation of civil war.



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

Basically you would have to go back over a century to find aggression on the part of Christians, committing terrorist acts. Yeah, the Irish did practice terrorism, but it wasn't due to religion, but due to a long ongoing war against England, that had been going on for centuries. Oh, and occasionally we do see what could be called terrorist acts against abortion clinics, because there are some radical Christian groups who see it as murder (tough subject). These extremely few acts of terrorism by Christians are extremely small in number compared to the regular acts of terrorism committed by Muslims.

What you don't see are honor killings, horrible treatment of women, child sex slavery, complete disregard for western rights, gang rapes of local women, harassment of women who do not meet their dress codes, and on and on. While radical elements of Christianity can be a pain, they are no where near as violent, or cruel as the Muslim religion.

Who ever this equality chief is, he should be forced to resign after such a comment.

What is evident, is that there is not compromise with Islam. There approach to peace, or cease fires, is to wait for their next opportunity to attack.


Let's see there's attacks on abortion clinics and abortionists by the Army of God.

There's innumerable lynchings and oppression committed by the KKK.

There's the Hutaree.

There's also Timothy McVeighs supporters, The Freeman Community.

...wow, I didn't know I'd been alive for over a century.



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluebelle
 


In response to my comment that most Westerner's who see Muslim women wearing that totally inappropriate head covering dress, think, "Wow, that womans father really screwed up her head". You made this comment.


Not ALL 'western people' think that at all. Or at least I hope they dont. Its a very sad world we're living in if the majority, out of pure ignorance, form an opinion on someones religion based on opinionated media outlets.


Yeah, most of us do think that, because that is the only reason Muslim women wear that stuff on a constant basis in public.

There are no cultures, where women are treated as equals, where women dress like that.

The only reason any women dress like that, is because their sexist culture conditioned them to believe that they were inferior to men, and incapable of moral strength, and a whole lot of other excrement.

What is ignorant, is for you to pretend differently.



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Bluebelle
 


In response to my comment that most Westerner's who see Muslim women wearing that totally inappropriate head covering dress, think, "Wow, that womans father really screwed up her head". You made this comment.


Not ALL 'western people' think that at all. Or at least I hope they dont. Its a very sad world we're living in if the majority, out of pure ignorance, form an opinion on someones religion based on opinionated media outlets.


Yeah, most of us do think that, because that is the only reason Muslim women wear that stuff on a constant basis in public.

There are no cultures, where women are treated as equals, where women dress like that.

The only reason any women dress like that, is because their sexist culture conditioned them to believe that they were inferior to men, and incapable of moral strength, and a whole lot of other excrement.

What is ignorant, is for you to pretend differently.



I really enjoy how you -a completely random individual- can tell me, WHY my wife wears the hijab. Something has GOT to be wrong... I mean really though.
edit on 21-6-2011 by My.mind.is.mine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by My.mind.is.mine
 


You should join the modern world, and catch up on current events.

Notice that none of your wiki links reported actual terrorist attacks.

You list small isolated groups, most likely compromised of people suffering from mental illness.

To put things in perspective, here are two wiki links on Muslim terrorism.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Anyone who takes their religion seriously is likely to be more "militant".

The simple fact is, in the West, most of what we call "Christianity" isn't anything like it once was. C.S. Lewis even put a name on it, "Christianity and water".

So, is Church of England pretty tame? Sure. Today's Catholics aren't likely to get up the courage to go on a religious crusade either. Methodists, Presbyterians, etc. All rather watered-down versions of something that once was a lot more potent.

Of course, there are other modern versions that retain some of the old fire. Probably many "evangelicals" will proudly consider themselves on that side of the spectrum.

In either case, the various groups can point to whatever Bible verses they want, to justify their positions.

Some, will even be perfectly OK with such things as carpet-bombings, of whoever the enemy de jour might be.

On the other side, we might have Muslims, and most of the above that I mention about Christians, also applies to them. You've got some who take their Koran very seriously, and others who regard Islam more from their particular cultural contexts. Sure, they want a Muslim wedding, and celebrate their holidays, etc. But if you ask them about jihad, they will tell you they've got a real life, a gas station to tend to, etc.

In both cases, extremist religionists are the problem.

But, perhaps you could retreat to something like "averages" to gain a better perspective. Maybe, because more Muslims come from nations that are mostly "behind", by Western standards, you would tend to find more Muslims who still take the Koran seriously, and therefore, would also tend to be comparatively more "extreme".

Certainly, not so long ago, many more "christians" took the Bible more seriously than they do today.

So, what possible "answer" suggests itself?

Probably, the further watering-down of religion could help, especially if one could focus a bit more on Islam, since Christianity has already been emasculated (thanks in no small measure to a couple of back-to-back world wars).

From the point of view of our masters, having already gained so much from massive warfare in the past, it seems reasonable that such a remedy might again become necessary.

Perhaps the religionists are going to get what they deserve maybe?

No worries! From my studies on the matter, a new religion has already been prepared for all of them to mutually enjoy, after they have been taken to the woodshed that is.

The survivors will be much more placid, and we probably won't even recognize our grandchildren. Peaceful little worker bees they shall be.

Meantime, perhaps religionists can keep up the good work. Our masters are almost certainly delighted!

JR



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by My.mind.is.mine
 


You are the one who brought up the whole stripper comparison. I am just giving my honest opinion.

I don't know your wife. You seem like an intelligent person, except for the crazy religious belief system, but there are varying degrees. Compared to the Tenochca, your beliefs are quite sane.

If a woman dresses up with in the head to toe covering, or head scarf, when she feels like it, I would guess she is only expressing cultural pride. If a woman always dressed like this in a western nation, she should seek counseling. Probably a lot of very bad memories bottled up in her head. Give Dr Drew a call some night, and get his opinion on "Love Line" if you are concerned.


edit on 21-6-2011 by poet1b because: change spelling



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join