Obama upsets US Christians....again

[kiwimac]

Heiferdust! He has referred to these acts as terrorism. What more do you want?

 

[rambot]

What's clear here is that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

rambot, the percentage of radical Muslims is far higher than 0.1% and as you yourself pointed out there are 1.5+ billion Muslims in the world...

http://people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/Muslim-American-Report.pdf

Even if the 0.1% number was accurate, the number of radical muslims would be at least 1.5 million (not 20 to 70 thousand).

If that percentage was 1% we're talking at least 15 million, 2% would be 30 million, 3% would be 45 million.

If 10% of the population of Muslims are radicals, we're looking at over 150 million.

EVen if I were to accept those numbers, 1% still means that 99% of people disagree. Even if we accept 5%, that means 95% disagree. 150 million sounds like an impressive an scarey number (hey good! Going along with the fear), but conversely, 1,350,000,000 is a MUCH bigger number.

Again, his claim is that nonradicalized muslims are not true muslims. Vis a vis, his claim is that 95% of muslims are not ACTUAL muslims.

That is ridiculous.

This is basic math rambot, and one can be a radical without actively participating in violence....

It IS basic math. He is suggesting that 5% is a BETTER representation of a religion than 95%. That doesn't, and shouldn't, fly.
But then I can take it as read that you have not actually had indepth study on the matter.


http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/JWSRGovtPurgeAndActiveMeasures5Dec2013.pdf

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/JWSRGovtPurgeAndActiveMeasures5Dec2013.pdf

It seems I've been paying better attention to what has been going on, than you have.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/JWSRGovtPurgeAndActiveMeasures5Dec2013.pdfIF you consider this study carefully, you'll see it has little bearing on what I was talking about. I was referring to the amount of information OBama, the CIA and FBI have regarding the workings of the Muslim communities. This study reads like something just kinda slapped up there with a loose connection to "Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood" without ACTUALLY proving that these organization did NOT know a lot about those communities and would therefore, not be able to make an informed classification.

That's a start, but I've yet to see much in the way of real action.

And you are not in the thick of it. Moderate muslims are getting KILLED for speaking out Garfield. It makes me kinda sad that you can't at least show respect for the few who dissent as much as they can before their safety is aggregiously compromised. I mean "that's a start" COULD be a considered a sign of respect to the numerous journalists who are jailed for speaking out. But I guess you have your own standards.

The problem with your argument and the arguments used by many liberals is the fact you are equating the accounts of historical events with the examples of how to live one's life. There are key sections of the Bible that talk about how people should behave, and other sections that refer to specific events that happened.

My problem with this is two fold garfield:
1) The issue with differentiating between "specific events that happenned" and "how people should behave" is that you make those two things completely, and utterly mutually exclusive of each other. Christ modelled Biblical living. He showed us how to live and love the way God wants us to by way of example. I'm not sure if that is something that is talked about from the pulpits of the church(es) you attend but I would bet I've heard "Christ showed us how to live" hundreds of times in my life. It's not reasonable, in my mind, to suggest that Christ only laid out rules for us.
2) There are stupid, hatefilled people who are intellectually impaired or uninterested in making distinctions between "how I'm told to live and", "well, if it's good for God, it's good for me". There are also hatefilled people who will stretch common sense (ie...God commanded Israel to smite their enemies. I'm doing the same thing). Violent people are stupid people. Power hungry people are manipulative and cunning (usually smart aswell) because they can TAKE violent people and use them to do things that they want for themselves.

I had to read it for a history class, btw I have no intention of converting to Islam. Btw, I really don't care if you consider my analysis to be informed or not, and quite frankly part of the problem as to why we saw Christians not behaving like Christians in the Middle Ages was people relying on authority figures in the Church to tell them what to think rather than reading the Bible for themselves.

Yeah. Except protestants AND Catholics were killing each other. So that isn't really right. IT was two ideologies warring against each other.


Explains why so many of the radicals have college degrees...

I'm guessing you haven't read the Quran...

Oh, let me be clear, that comment was NOT based on MY understanding of the Qu'ran, that was PURE inkfingers (or at least, my understanding of inkfingers' argument). You're right, I haven't read the Qu'ran, but I've many engaging conversations with moderate Muslims; a few of which are my friends.

Look I'm well aware of the fact that there can be more that one interpretation, but if we look at the more literal translation we can see the extremism.

What makes me laugh so hard is the same is usualyl said of Christian extremism (which doesn't happen often but DOES happen).

The problem is that what they're saying publicly and what they're saying behind closed doors can be two very different things.

"can" is a really, really, really important word in that sentence though right? You accept that?

So if I can name 1 person that is in denial, you'd admit you're wrong?

President Barack H. Obama.

Tell you what, find me a quote where Obama EXPLICITLY states "There's NO such thing as muslim extremism". I'm not talking about one where he says "Islam is fine" or "The future does not belong to those who slander Mohammed" or "The sweetest sound is the call to prayer". I want to see him explicitly say that there is no such thing as muslim extremism.

This isn't several hundred years ago rambot, this is 2015. Lecturing people over the behavior of distant ancestors to say they have no reason to condemn horrific behavior that happened only a few days ago, is dishonest, and downright offensive.

You are personalizing a conversation about a religion. I'm not blaming people now on their ancestor's behaviour. I'm reminding them of their religion's history.


Both holy tracts can be used by the wrong person to do evil things. That Christianity had it happen frequently in their past and less so now doesn't mean it didn't happen. That's why I suggested it was a "growth phase" of a religion; internal conflict over dogma. Christianity went through it in the middle ages (it SUCKED then).

 

[Arcangl86]

Also, people seem to be missing the fact that the Crusades were an official act of the Church, while there has been massive outcry by the Muslim community against the actions of groups such as Boko Haram and ISIS.

 

[nightflight]

Also, people seem to be missing the fact that the Crusades were an official act of the Church, while there has been massive outcry by the Muslim community against the actions of groups such as Boko Haram and ISIS.

That medieval Christian thing is under control. Its okay.

 

[rambot]

That medieval Christian thing is under control. Its okay.

And anything that happenned in the past has absolutely no importance on anything that happens ever again.

 

[TerranceL]

And anything that happenned in the past has absolutely no importance on anything that happens ever again.

Do you believe the modern church is the same as the church during the time of the crusades?

 

[Arcangl86]

Do you believe the modern church is the same as the church during the time of the crusades?

Last I checked it was still made up of fallen human beings, so yes.

 

[nightflight]

And anything that happenned in the past has absolutely no importance on anything that happens ever again.

When it does, it does. When it doesn't..........

 

[nightflight]

.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Of course, that's not what Garfield wrote. He said that the sins of one group of Christians are not automatically counted as the sins of Christians living hundreds of years later.

Agreed -- but it doesn't change the fact that Christians have, in the past, committed atrocities in the name of Christ. Whether or not those atrocities were committed in the last month or the last millennium doesn't change the fact that they were, in fact, committed.

At no point have I ever said or implied that Christians in general, or Christianity as a whole, should be blamed for the actions of a few deranged members... that would be ridiculous.

Agreed?

 

[marshlewis]

Do you believe the modern church is the same as the church during the time of the crusades?

If the Church had the power it did during the crusades then I think Yes!.

 

[TLK Valentine]

If the Church had the power it did during the crusades then I think Yes!.

Indeed -- the rise in secularism is what stripped the church of the power to commit atrocity without accountability...

 

[TLK Valentine]

Do you believe the modern church is the same as the church during the time of the crusades?

No, because society has long since de-fanged it.

 

[TerranceL]

If the Church had the power it did during the crusades then I think Yes!.

And if the industrial revolution had taken place 500 years earlier we might have moon bases.

I don't care what you think might be I asked for an opinion on what currently is.

 

[TerranceL]

Last I checked it was still made up of fallen human beings, so yes.

There's fallen human beings who murder and fallen human beings who file their taxes a day late.

Pretending they are the same thing is silly.

 

[TerranceL]

No, because society has long since de-fanged it.

Hey finally someone with an answer that's not a dodge!

Exactly, Christianity today is nothing at all like it was 800 years ago.

Why are we pretending like it is?

This is more or less what's happening.

Bob: Hey man did you hear what Dan did?

Carl and Dave: No man what?

Bob: He ran over a kid and kept driving!

Carl: Oh man that's so horrible I always thought Dan was a little dodgy.

Dave: Carl who are you to say anything? Your great great great great great grandfather was a cannibal!?

Comparing Carl to Dave would be stupid. Comparing middle Christianity to modern Islam is also stupid.

Obama and apparently some of the folks in this thread don't appear to realize there was a small event that happened since the Crusades, mainly the Enlightenment.

They still teach that in history right?

 

[kiwimac]

The assertion that because time has passed since Christians killed in the name of God somehow makes it unimportant misses the point entirely. We have no high moral ground from which to condemn Islam and we need to remember that.

 

[Inkfingers]

The assertion that because time has passed since Christians killed in the name of God somehow makes it unimportant misses the point entirely. We have no high moral ground from which to condemn Islam and we need to remember that.

By that argument Italians cannot complain about murder because of the murders carried out by Rome.

 

[Senator Cheese]

The assertion that because time has passed since Christians killed in the name of God somehow makes it unimportant misses the point entirely. We have no high moral ground from which to condemn Islam and we need to remember that.

We have no right to condemn Muslims who perpetrated acts of violence because they have been misguided to sin. I don't doubt that if I had grown up in a Muslim household in Gaza, that I would hate Jews and Christians. Therefore, we are no "better" - we can just consider ourselves lucky to have grown up in an environment in which love, not hate, was taught.

On the other hand, we have every right and duty to condemn and combat ideologies that spurt hate. Islam is not the way, at least not an Islam that encourages the killing of apostates and allows for the stoning of women. These practices are barbaric and not Christlike.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Hey finally someone with an answer that's not a dodge!

Exactly, Christianity today is nothing at all like it was 800 years ago.

Why are we pretending like it is?

This is more or less what's happening.

Actually, it's not what's happening at all.

Christianity has a bloody history -- this is a fact.

The attitude seems to be, "it happened a long time ago, therefore it never happened."

Nobody is claiming that Christianity is violent and atrocious today -- that claim is reserved for Islam.

Nobody is claiming that the entire religion is violent and atrocious -- again, that claim is reserved for Islam.

Nobody is claiming that every single Christian should be held responsible for the actions of its most atrocious members, past or present -- once again, that claim is reserved for Islam.

Obama and apparently some of the folks in this thread don't appear to realize there was a small event that happened since the Crusades, mainly the Enlightenment.

They still teach that in history right?

Apparently they don't teach much of what we were enlightened from.... These things happened; that's a fact.

Christianity was, for lack of a better term, saved form itself thanks to the Enlightenment. Clearly, Islam is in desperate need of a similar paradigm-shifting event.

Alas, if it ever does come, it certainly won't come from the Christians.