French Magazine Runs Cartoons That Mock Muhammad, page 3


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 15 times


reply posted on 19-9-2012 @ 10:20 AM by TrueBrit
reply to post by RogerT3


The key thing in that scenario is that the idea that my sisters biological output is the best is an opinion, and while I can respect your right to have an opinion, I can also prove that opinion error strewn. Apart from anything else my sisters diet is rather poor, but that aside, it is not a matter of faith.

Not to mention, my sister would destroy you if you insisted on taking her product. Shes about as understanding over matters of personal space as I am. Its a self defeating ideal that.

But where matters of faith are concerned, one cannot be proven better than another, one God cannot be considered on balance against another, because each faith denies the existence of, or importance of, other deities. Despite that, we all have to get along, otherwise we destroy the earth, and one another. So we have to come up with compromises that work for all scenarios and peoples. We do not have a choice in this matter.


reply posted on 19-9-2012 @ 10:28 AM by TrueBrit
reply to post by Hanrak77


Um, actually, if you dislike Christians because they are Christian, and not because each individual you have come across has irked you personally, then the chances are that you are a xenophobic goose stepper, on a one way trip to hell. If however you have understandable reasons for disliking Christian individuals then that is a different matter. Also, you may dislike many people who are Christian, but saying that you dislike Christians as a whole group is pretty racist, yeah.

Essentially, if you dislike any body because of a demographic they belong to, rather than on thier individual merits, you probably arent worth the skin you are in.


reply posted on 19-9-2012 @ 10:41 AM by RogerT3
Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by RogerT3


The key thing in that scenario is that the idea that my sisters biological output is the best is an opinion, and while I can respect your right to have an opinion, I can also prove that opinion error strewn. Apart from anything else my sisters diet is rather poor, but that aside, it is not a matter of faith.

Not to mention, my sister would destroy you if you insisted on taking her product. Shes about as understanding over matters of personal space as I am. Its a self defeating ideal that.

But where matters of faith are concerned, one cannot be proven better than another, one God cannot be considered on balance against another, because each faith denies the existence of, or importance of, other deities. Despite that, we all have to get along, otherwise we destroy the earth, and one another. So we have to come up with compromises that work for all scenarios and peoples. We do not have a choice in this matter.


I totally agree that compromise is a valuable approach. Do you think the compromise should be one sided though, as that is what it sounds like?

I'm all for compassion, but your argument lost that high ground when you admitted to punching people out and wanting to slit throats over their voiced opinions.

So does compassion for poor lost souls, who identify so absolutely with an interpretation of a book that they have lost their own sense of humanity, mean restricting or banning the self expression of others, or do we perhaps instead embrace compassion in our exposure of the fragility of the egoic mind and it's accompanying insanity?

Not saying Charlie Hebdo was coming from this place by the way, but the discussion is wider than simply saying a magazine is right or wrong.
edit on 19-9-2012 by RogerT3 because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 19-9-2012 @ 10:42 AM by thoughtsfull
Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by RogerT3


The key thing in that scenario is that the idea that my sisters biological output is the best is an opinion, and while I can respect your right to have an opinion, I can also prove that opinion error strewn. Apart from anything else my sisters diet is rather poor, but that aside, it is not a matter of faith.

Not to mention, my sister would destroy you if you insisted on taking her product. Shes about as understanding over matters of personal space as I am. Its a self defeating ideal that.

But where matters of faith are concerned, one cannot be proven better than another, one God cannot be considered on balance against another, because each faith denies the existence of, or importance of, other deities. Despite that, we all have to get along, otherwise we destroy the earth, and one another. So we have to come up with compromises that work for all scenarios and peoples. We do not have a choice in this matter.


Compromise is great, but mostly that comes down to ignoring those who annoy or offend you... much as most of the country tends to do about my neck of the woods... the whole "no popery" thing they have going isn't going to change any time soon, nor is the whole "lets burn effigies of everyone we think is naughty" and while it does offend some after a few hundred years most now ignore them, and no harm is done.

It has however been touch and go at times with the police reading the riot act but getting thrown in the river for their impertinence, so now the agreement is one of ignoring, putting fingers in the ears and humming rather loudly around the 5th. Seems to work quite well...


reply posted on 19-9-2012 @ 10:43 AM by Hanrak77
Originally posted by TrueBrit
reply to post by Hanrak77


Um, actually, if you dislike Christians because they are Christian, and not because each individual you have come across has irked you personally, then the chances are that you are a xenophobic goose stepper, on a one way trip to hell. If however you have understandable reasons for disliking Christian individuals then that is a different matter. Also, you may dislike many people who are Christian, but saying that you dislike Christians as a whole group is pretty racist, yeah.

Essentially, if you dislike any body because of a demographic they belong to, rather than on thier individual merits, you probably arent worth the skin you are in.


No, you are confusing discrimination with racism there buddy. I will save you from further embarrassment but if you would like me to post a link to the Oxford dictionary's definition of racism feel free to ask. It's not racist to disagree or even dislike a religion or followers of that religion. If you dislike said religion because of skin colour or ethnic origin then we have racism.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal
  Posted 13 days ago with 79 member flags
Neil Armstrong dead at age 82 - report
  Posted 17 days ago with 63 member flags
Judge orders release of detained Marine veteran
  Posted 19 days ago with 58 member flags
Birds hold \'funerals\' for dead
  Posted 10 days ago with 55 member flags
TSA agents swarm Ron Paul\'s plane, demand explosives check
  Posted 11 days ago with 47 member flags
Mysterious Changes in Ocean Salt Spur NASA Expedition
  Posted 1 days ago with 36 member flags
Ga. Murder Case Uncovers Terror Plot by Soldiers
  Posted 15 days ago with 32 member flags