That depends on: 1) The fragility of your own faith
You imply weakness where none exist. Reading a few sentences which portray Mohammad and thus Islam in a positive manner is no more a test of a Christians faith than is having to witness the constant blather of atheist professing theirs.
2) English comprehension skills
I'm sorry to hear that. What part of this sentence:
The responses to Muhammads teachings were at first erratic. Some people responded favorably, while other resisted his claim that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad his Prophet.
...is giving you trouble?
3) Your desperation/need to feel like you are a victim and under attack.
Christianity is under attack, from a variety of sources, to include Islam. When somewhere around 1,000 Christians are killed simply because they were Christians, would you not categorize that as an attack?
Christians under attack by Muslims in Syria
1,000 Christians have been killed in Syria, 200K more have fled the country. Christian churches were in Damascus 600 years before the Muslim religion even began but now Christians make up less than 10% of the population. It is almost an identical story to what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan. Christians fear that if the rebels, who are made up of Muslim extremists take over, they will be persecuted and killed.
Source:
http://www.wnd.com/wnd_video/christians-under-attack-by-muslims-in-syria/
However your evocation of victim status is nothing but an attempt to belittle.
4) One's ability to distinguish one's own role as a member of the "power group" (major religion) and a willingness to see the systemic benefits one receives from that.
So Christians comprise a power elite, or a privileged class? Must be only the white Christians, of course.
The implication that there is no coverage of Christian history in the Florida standards made in this post is false.
Seriously, you are going to have to try harder than this. I made no claim nor did I imply there was no coverage of Christian history in the Florida standards. But since you apparently had trouble understanding the context of my comments, please allow me to explain.
In post number 141, Morningstar said this:
[*]Common core says nothing about religion.
[*]Common core says zero things about religion.
[*]Religion is not a part of the common core.
My post was primarily in response to this claim, and I showed that Common Core does indeed "say things" about religion, to include Islam.
I do not know if that implication is made deliberately or not.
You think I posted my comments by accident? However again I made no such implication. From my post number 170:
First I doubt students know about Christianity at any level this comment supposes.
There is no implication to be drawn from this comment at all, as I clearly stated what I meant to state. I did not say students know nothing about Christianity, or that Common Core does not mention Christianity, I said I doubted students in High School know about Christianity at the level the article comment supposed.
In any event, one can review the standards at the links provided. SS.912.W.2 is most of what we used to call Western Civ, with the much-needed addition of the Eastern Roman Empire. Many of the sub standards include topics on Christian history.
Thanks for supporting my point.
Apparently Sistrin and Garfield are still convinced that Common Core is part of a conspiracy to turn American children into socialist Muslims.
Again not what I said. I pointed out that groups such as CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the INSA are all supporters of Common Core, and have written as to why. From the manifesto, quote:
"The process of settlement is a "Civilization-Jihadist Process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in elimination and destroying the Western Civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions."
And from a few pages down:
"Understanding the US society from its different aspects an understanding that "qualifies" us to perform the mission of settling our Dawa in its country and growing it on its land."
Source:
http://whatacopneeds2know.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/muslim-brotherhood-manifesto-arab-english.pdf
It is hard to hide behind the conspiracy canard when such groups are clear about what they want to achieve.
I've posted links to the standards and reiterated numerous times that the standards do not promote religion...
That isn't what you said. I quoted what you said and you were wrong.
...but conspiracy theorists don't let reality get in the way of their conspiracy theories.
I don't stick my head in the sand and deny the nature of radical Islam because Bush.
