NationStates

Kotta Telangana wrote:

Gauthier wrote:
Funny, the tone of the thread hasn't been "There's a problem with fundamentalism and radicalism in Islam and we need everyone to solve that problem." It's been more like "Islam is a violent, immoral religion and it needs to be done away with by any means."

What is wrong for wanting to eliminate Islam? Any rational human being with a decent moral compass should be strongly opposed to Islam. Those who support Islam are either ignorant or immoral.

Lordieth wrote:

Kotta Telangana wrote:
What is wrong for wanting to eliminate Islam? Any rational human being with a decent moral compass should be strongly opposed to Islam. Those who support Islam are either ignorant or immoral.

Unless you apply that logic to every major religion, it's not gonna wash. I don't hear the outcry to eliminate Christianity (not in the West, anyway), yet the Bible isn't exactly a paragon of moral virtues either. That's because the problem is fundamentalism. Not religion. You can't eliminate religion.

Dyrrachium wrote:

Imperializt Russia wrote:In terms of terror 9/11 is a literally huge blip of bodycount. It's a thing that happened once. No incident has since eclipsed at and it's likely that no incident will.

Bodycount is a very short-sighted way of looking at terrorism since 9/11 weights it absurdly anyway. It misses the other factors and problems of terrorism. It's just used because it's the simplest and most easily digestible metric - a number describing a bad thing.

I didn't say 9/11 but okay. My point is that radical religion in the modern world, where explosives are common place, where nuclear weapons exist, where long range missiles exist, where there is simply too devastating weapons to be used in the name of some unproven deity, is incredibly dangerous. This wasn't as much a case in the Crusades. The crusades weren't intended, and could never, completely exterminate all muslims. The jihad of ISIS although unlikely, could kill all non muslims, and that's their goal.

Politicoandrous Anthronegative Proplex wrote:

Lordieth wrote:
Unless you apply that logic to every major religion, it's not gonna wash. I don't hear the outcry to eliminate Christianity (not in the West, anyway), yet the Bible isn't exactly a paragon of moral virtues either. That's because the problem is fundamentalism. Not religion. You can't eliminate religion.

Fundamentalist Buddhism and Christianity is supposed to be inherently peaceful, however.

Lordieth wrote:

Politicoandrous Anthronegative Proplex wrote:
Fundamentalist Buddhism and Christianity is supposed to be inherently peaceful, however.

Is it? Doesn't the bible talk about killing people who believe in other gods?

Kotta Telangana wrote:

Gauthier wrote:
Funny, the tone of the thread hasn't been "There's a problem with fundamentalism and radicalism in Islam and we need everyone to solve that problem." It's been more like "Islam is a violent, immoral religion and it needs to be done away with by any means."

What is wrong with wanting to eliminate Islam? Any rational human being with a decent moral compass should be strongly opposed to Islam. Those who support Islam are either ignorant or immoral.

Transoxthraxia wrote:

Lordieth wrote:
Is it? Doesn't the bible talk about killing people who believe in other gods?

I don't remember hearing about this passage. Could I get a link or source?

Deuteronomy 13:1-18 ESV

“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery, to make you leave the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from your midst. ...

Imperializt Russia wrote:

Lockdownn wrote:Or lots of things.

Religion of piece my ass.

Christianity is so lovey hand-holding in strawberry fields.

Lordieth wrote:

Transoxthraxia wrote:I don't remember hearing about this passage. Could I get a link or source?

Deuteronomy 13:1-18 ESV

“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery, to make you leave the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from your midst. ...

Transoxthraxia wrote:

Lordieth wrote:
Is it? Doesn't the bible talk about killing people who believe in other gods?

I don't remember hearing about this passage. Could I get a link or source?

The Alma Mater wrote:

Lordieth wrote:

Deuteronomy contains much better "KILL ALL NONBELIEVERS" verses

Still, I cannot help but notice that noone else wants to discuss the actual point of the OP

The Alma Mater wrote:

Lordieth wrote:

Deuteronomy contains much better "KILL ALL NONBELIEVERS" verses

Still, I cannot help but notice that noone else wants to discuss the actual point of the OP

Dyrrachium wrote:

The Alma Mater wrote:
Deuteronomy contains much better "KILL ALL NONBELIEVERS" verses

Still, I cannot help but notice that noone else wants to discuss the actual point of the OP

Because the point of OP is batshit crazy

Dyrrachium wrote:

The Alma Mater wrote:
Deuteronomy contains much better "KILL ALL NONBELIEVERS" verses

Still, I cannot help but notice that noone else wants to discuss the actual point of the OP

Because the point of OP is batshit crazy

Gauthier wrote:

Kotta Telangana wrote:
What is wrong with wanting to eliminate Islam? Any rational human being with a decent moral compass should be strongly opposed to Islam. Those who support Islam are either ignorant or immoral.

So again, why not internment camps?

Avalon wrote:

Imperializt Russia wrote:Christianity is so lovey hand-holding in strawberry fields.

We're not talking Christianity, are we? Christianity can be the worst thing ever, but NOT a valid argument about if a different thing is immoral or not.

Now, is Islam immoral based on those quotes? it may be, if those obviously sexist principles have some effect on women's rights, freedoms and life. In many Muslim countries and areas it would seem so, and those beliefs are behind many sexist and homophobic laws and customs.

Gauthier wrote:

The Alma Mater wrote:
Deuteronomy contains much better "KILL ALL NONBELIEVERS" verses

Still, I cannot help but notice that noone else wants to discuss the actual point of the OP

The point of the OP is basically a "LOL EBIL MOOZLEMZ" wankfest.

Lordieth wrote:

Transoxthraxia wrote:I don't remember hearing about this passage. Could I get a link or source?

Deuteronomy 13:1-18 ESV

“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or wonder that he tells you comes to pass, and if he says, ‘Let us go after other gods,’ which you have not known, ‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God is testing you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the Lord your God and fear him and keep his commandments and obey his voice, and you shall serve him and hold fast to him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has taught rebellion against the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt and redeemed you out of the house of slavery, to make you leave the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from your midst. ...

Kotta Telangana wrote:

Gauthier wrote:
So again, why not internment camps?

I am opposed to using state violence or coercion to destroy religion, because this opens the way for all sorts of abuses of human rights by states. Rather, I support the usage of rational argument and free criticism to marginalize religions like Islam and demonstrate their underlying immorality and absurdity. In other words, I do not object to the goal of destroying Islam, but I think we should be careful about the means we choose to achieve that goal.

Gauthier wrote:

Kotta Telangana wrote:
I am opposed to using state violence or coercion to destroy religion, because this opens the way for all sorts of abuses of human rights by states. Rather, I support the usage of rational argument and free criticism to marginalize religions like Islam and demonstrate their underlying immorality and absurdity. In other words, I do not object to the goal of destroying Islam, but I think we should be careful about the means we choose to achieve that goal.

No religion in the world has ever been eliminated through arguments alone. Anytime a religion has been erased, violence has always been involved in the process.

The Alma Mater wrote:

Gauthier wrote:
The point of the OP is basically a "LOL EBIL MOOZLEMZ" wankfest.

Yes, I mentioned that earlier.
I also mentioned that he has a point that Islam is really very, very, very vague on the afterlife for women while it is lyrical about that for men.

Transoxthraxia wrote:

Gauthier wrote:
No religion in the world has ever been eliminated through arguments alone. Anytime a religion has been erased, violence has always been involved in the process.

Like Zoroastrianism or Manichaeism at the hands of Islam.

Transoxthraxia wrote:

Lordieth wrote:

Ah, okay. I'm not a Christian myself, so I'm not overly familiar with scripture.

Gauthier wrote:

Kotta Telangana wrote:
I am opposed to using state violence or coercion to destroy religion, because this opens the way for all sorts of abuses of human rights by states. Rather, I support the usage of rational argument and free criticism to marginalize religions like Islam and demonstrate their underlying immorality and absurdity. In other words, I do not object to the goal of destroying Islam, but I think we should be careful about the means we choose to achieve that goal.

No religion in the world has ever been eliminated through arguments alone. Anytime a religion has been erased, violence has always been involved in the process.