Muslim Uber driver rapes and kills British diplomat

[iluvatar5150]

Anti-rapist bigotry?

No.

ProTip: You can be anti-rapist without being anti-Muslim.

 

[ananda]

Christianity does not promote the killing of those who do not believe as Christians. Islam does.

Luke 19:27

 

[expos4ever]

ProTip: You can be anti-rapist without being anti-Muslim.

Of course you can. And this is obviously true. To suggest that we are not concerned about the rape is profoundly dishonest and cynical.

 

[expos4ever]

Luke 19:27

Oh please. It took me 10 seconds to discover that this text is from a parable. Given the context of the chapter, the entire gospel, and the rest of the New Testament, it is clear that Jesus cannot be promoting killing.

 

[ananda]

Oh please. It took me 10 seconds to discover that this text is from a parable. Given the context of the chapter, the entire gospel, and the rest of the New Testament, it is clear that Jesus cannot be promoting killing.

What & who is the parable about, then?

 

[expos4ever]

Even the same poster, later down, admitted this is MORE likely to occur with Muslims. ???

No! You need to read more carefully! I NEVER "admitted this is MORE likely to occur with Muslims".

 

[All Englands Skies]

You did quite exceptionally well until you got to the bolded part. Once you spouted that, you fed right into the Islamophobia machine.

I did nothing, I said not one word that would imply that I was "using every example of a non-practicing Muslim to tarnish Islam". It is simply true that if you wear a short skirt in many Islamic nations, you are going to have a lot more problems than if you do in Western nations. That is not a "tarnish"; that is the truth.

To "tarnish" Islam would be to say, "And that is because Islam is a death cult" or some other horrid line, or perhaps, "We can never expect better of Muslims, after all". I said none of those things, did I?

Please don't buy into the "tarnish Islam" nonsense. Liberals have no reservations about "tarnishing Christianity", do they? When they speak about Christianity? Nor should they, if they are speaking truth.

You are correct in the sense of when I said "Islam", I should have said (and meant) to say "Muslims", but that was simply a slip on my behalf, I know full well Islam is an ideology based on supremacy, but that does not mean all Muslims follow it fully, don't worry, I will never get sucked into the Islamophobia machine.

 

[Sistrin]

This may be true now, but, to be fair, it certainly was not true in the accounts we have in the Old Testament.

We do not live under Old Testament covenant. Your deflection is just that.

 

[expos4ever]

We do not live under Old Testament covenant. Your deflection is just that.

There was no intent to deflect. The point is that a certain degree of care is required when a Christian criticizes Islam for its purported promotion of violence. After all, we too have at least a history of such violence even if we are arguably now under a new covenant.

 

[expos4ever]

What & who is the parable about, then?

The parable has been interpreted many ways, but none come even remotely close to justifying violence. The order to kill at the end of the parable is clearly a literary device to underscore the importance of learning the lesson.

Some have interpreted the parable to be a general lesson about taking risks to advance the kingdom of God. Others, including me, think it is a criticism of the Jewish leadership - that they have not upheld their covenant obligations.

But I am quite sure no reasonable person sees the parable as endorsing violence

 

[expos4ever]

The Truth is Bigotry. Example: wearing a short skirt in a Muslim nation is a crime. You can't say that. You can only call people bigots for noticing.

Orwell Award, 2018.

Who here is defending the culture of Muslin nations. To be concerned about racist and inflammatory imagery and headlines does not necessarily equate to lack of concern about cultural practices in Muslim countries.

 

[rambot]

You did quite exceptionally well until you got to the bolded part. Once you spouted that, you fed right into the Islamophobia machine.

I did nothing, I said not one word that would imply that I was "using every example of a non-practicing Muslim to tarnish Islam". It is simply true that if you wear a short skirt in many Islamic nations, you are going to have a lot more problems than if you do in Western nations. That is not a "tarnish"; that is the truth.

To "tarnish" Islam would be to say, "And that is because Islam is a death cult" or some other horrid line, or perhaps, "We can never expect better of Muslims, after all". I said none of those things, did I?

Please don't buy into the "tarnish Islam" nonsense. Liberals have no reservations about "tarnishing Christianity", do they? When they speak about Christianity? Nor should they, if they are speaking truth.

Im liberal and i dont tarnishing christianity. Maybe you mean to say that people who disagree with you, chrisitian or not

 

[rambot]

This may be true now, but, to be fair, it certainly was not true in the accounts we have in the Old Testament.

Or the behaviour of the church for say 1400 years or so...

 

[ananda]

The parable has been interpreted many ways, but none come even remotely close to justifying violence. The order to kill at the end of the parable is clearly a literary device to underscore the importance of learning the lesson.

Some have interpreted the parable to be a general lesson about taking risks to advance the kingdom of God. Others, including me, think it is a criticism of the Jewish leadership - that they have not upheld their covenant obligations.

But I am quite sure no reasonable person sees the parable as endorsing violence

The "nobleman [who] went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom" (Luke 19:12) can only refer to Jesus himself as he explains the expected return of his kingdom (Luke 19:11). He returns to make account of his servants (Luke 19:12-26). Then he orders his servants to bring & slay before him those who refuse his reign (Luke 19:27); they are not tolerated. Who else can this parable refer to?

IMO "slay" is certainly violent. In the end, don't mainstream Christians believe that "those who do not believe as Christians" will end up killed (or worse, sent to eternal suffering)?

 

[All Englands Skies]

Or the behaviour of the church for say 1400 years or so...

Which is a great source of embarrassment for Christians, often highlighted by atheists to show the hypocrisy of Christians, that we say we believe in Jesus' teachings then act in a way totally opposite to his teachings.

Muslims on the other hand in the main are proud of their past, justify their conquests and violence and when violent, don't feel like hypocrites, as they're not going against Muhammeds teachings, when acting violent, hence their is no hypocrisy in acting that way.

Don't people have memories, prior to 9/11, critics of Christianity held Christianity responsible for all history and crimes, atheists would deal in absolutes when talking about Christians, they did not distinguish, we were all following an outdated creed, which is/was a source of great violence, a negative ideology on the whole.
But since 9/11 and Islam has come to the for front, its suddenly changed around, now when talking about Islam and Muslims, its wrong to deal in "absolutes", its wrong to judge the entire religion, its wrong to call it evil as an ideology, its wrong to keep bringing up the wrongs of Islam.
Now Christians (and others, too) are judging Islam in the same way atheists mainly judged Christianity prior to 9/11 its a problem, because the goal posts have been shifted once again.

On a side note, ah, 9/11, who could forget, because now, being against Islam is a simple "fear of people with brown skin" (because all Muslims must be brown it seems), the fact that planes smashing into the Trade centres that triggered majority of the "islamophobes" into action must have been an imaginary event, always bemuses me how the actions of Islamists are never seen as contributing factors to "Islamophobia", as if people's knee jerk reactions against Islam came out of nowhere.

 

[Liza B.]

Consider if you will a post which used photos to draw attention to a murder of a young, pretty, black liberal woman by a Trump supporter. And supposed the Trump supporter was shown hold a confederate flag while wearing a "Make America Great Again" cap, a "Jesus is my Co-Pilot" t-shirt.

You guys would literally fly off the handle, claiming this is an unfair, inflammatory effort to tar Trump supporters as hate-filled racists. And you would be right so to do.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Pardon me if I, and others, choose to act as a brake against the incipient racism and bigotry that has infected so much of what passes for rational discourse these days.

Very poor comparison.

Be as objective as you can. Is there a DIRECT connection between "Trumpism" and killing black women? Are there texts, with leaders claiming the texts are valid, that say "Trumpism says the rules for black women are X and Y and Z?"

Or did you make a tentative connection between voting for Trump, a whole different ideology, and murder?

Because the links between Islam, short skirts, and rules for short skirts are not as tentative, I assure you.

 

[Liza B.]

Let me first dispense with the claim that there is no evidence. Do you believe these images of an attractive young white skinned woman juxtaposed with the image of a brown-skinned man with a rifle DON'T appeal to base racist/xenophobic sentiments?
View attachment 217806

If so, I have some swampland property in which you might be interested.

This man confessed to the murder and you're worried about him being shown holding a gun. He confessed, so he ACTUALLY murdered her...and again, you're STILL worried about him being shown with a gun.

An actual murderer. Okay. Wow.

 

[Liza B.]

Luke 19:27

Honestly, you would have done better to not have quoted that at all, it's so badly ripped out of context.

 

[ananda]

Honestly, you would have done better to not have quoted that at all, it's so badly ripped out of context.

What's the correct context?

 

[Liza B.]

Or the behaviour of the church for say 1400 years or so...

These posts are six minutes apart.

Six minutes.

Im liberal and i dont tarnishing christianity. Maybe you mean to say that people who disagree with you, chrisitian or not