Major-Tom wrote:
The Deus VULT crusader dimwits and SJWs on NSG are two sides of the same pants on head retarded coin.
If you say "DEUS VULT" or "MICROAGGRESSIONs" in a non ironic fashion, you're probably quite stupid.
Deus Vulting Microaggressions
Advertisement
by Napkiraly » Sun May 01, 2016 4:05 am
Major-Tom wrote:
The Deus VULT crusader dimwits and SJWs on NSG are two sides of the same pants on head retarded coin.
If you say "DEUS VULT" or "MICROAGGRESSIONs" in a non ironic fashion, you're probably quite stupid.
by -The West Coast- » Sun May 01, 2016 4:09 am
by The Peoples of Xaer » Sun May 01, 2016 4:14 am
-The West Coast- wrote:Europe is a hostile environment for Muslims. If anyone is surprised that there is and will be more anti-Islam attacks, then that's just ignorant.
by The United Colonies of Earth » Sun May 01, 2016 4:22 am
by Jochistan » Sun May 01, 2016 4:50 am
by Kriga » Sun May 01, 2016 5:09 am
by Ostroeuropa » Sun May 01, 2016 5:26 am
Kriga wrote:Napkiraly wrote:I'm pretty sure UCE isn't being serious.
A serious anti-islam advocate would criticise the religion itself, not slander the people who worship it, or disrespect them.
An islamophobic bigot on the other hand, would go out of his way to slander Muhammad, shout pejoratives at Muslims and nitpick at their religion without critically analysing Islam's scripture.
by Jochistan » Sun May 01, 2016 5:37 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:Kriga wrote:
A serious anti-islam advocate would criticise the religion itself, not slander the people who worship it, or disrespect them.
An islamophobic bigot on the other hand, would go out of his way to slander Muhammad, shout pejoratives at Muslims and nitpick at their religion without critically analysing Islam's scripture.
Why bother debating the scripture of scientology when its patently nonsense, when you can simply point out that it's qualitatively different in social effects?
Debating theologically on it is giving it a level of credence. It has none.
Islam is no different.
It's adherents thinking otherwise is besides the point when it comes to demanding institutions, the public, and the media oppose these religions.
Come to think of it, Scientology is more compatible with the western world than Islam, because it just abuses its followers human rights, and infiltrates institutions to demand tax breaks, no different from a corporation there then.
It doesn't on top of that, result in shit blowing up, rape gangs, infiltrate institutions to drag them kicking and screaming back to the 9th century, and mutilate childrens genitals.
And Germany banned scientology.
Why not Islam?
The winged donkey is more credible than aliens?
If you say so.
If the religion is a regressive religion, then ofcourse it will effect the behavior of its adherents. That's why we're talking about it and them.
I think any one religion is as silly as any other, but only some of them cause public policy concerns due to the behavior and mentality of their adherents.
I think the real disrespect for muslims comes from the Islamophiles insisting they aren't a threat, who grossly underestimate the agency of determined individuals.
by Ostroeuropa » Sun May 01, 2016 5:41 am
Jochistan wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
Why bother debating the scripture of scientology when its patently nonsense, when you can simply point out that it's qualitatively different in social effects?
Debating theologically on it is giving it a level of credence. It has none.
Islam is no different.
It's adherents thinking otherwise is besides the point when it comes to demanding institutions, the public, and the media oppose these religions.
Come to think of it, Scientology is more compatible with the western world than Islam, because it just abuses its followers human rights, and infiltrates institutions to demand tax breaks, no different from a corporation there then.
It doesn't on top of that, result in shit blowing up, rape gangs, infiltrate institutions to drag them kicking and screaming back to the 9th century, and mutilate childrens genitals.
And Germany banned scientology.
Why not Islam?
The winged donkey is more credible than aliens?
If you say so.
If the religion is a regressive religion, then ofcourse it will effect the behavior of its adherents. That's why we're talking about it and them.
I think any one religion is as silly as any other, but only some of them cause public policy concerns due to the behavior and mentality of their adherents.
I think the real disrespect for muslims comes from the Islamophiles insisting they aren't a threat, who grossly underestimate the agency of determined individuals.
That's definately the case with some Muslims. I don't see why it's so hard to focus on the actual problem of fundamentalist.
Then again, you basically consider any Muslim less liberal than you to be a fundamentalist. So maybe theres not really a point in arguing.
by Jochistan » Sun May 01, 2016 5:49 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:Jochistan wrote:That's definately the case with some Muslims. I don't see why it's so hard to focus on the actual problem of fundamentalist.
Then again, you basically consider any Muslim less liberal than you to be a fundamentalist. So maybe theres not really a point in arguing.
I don't deny there's such a thing as a moderate and modernized muslim. I deny they are a majority. As a consequence, the go to defence of "That's only a minority of them!" that people typically have for migrants is... well, wrong.
Regardless, it's not relevant to the question of whether the problem should be debated theologically or not.
There are, hypothetically, such a thing as Scientology moderates. It wouldn't make it a theological matter. Talking about the religion and its negative effect on reality and such. "What are the drawbacks of this existing?".
by Ostroeuropa » Sun May 01, 2016 5:53 am
Jochistan wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
I don't deny there's such a thing as a moderate and modernized muslim. I deny they are a majority. As a consequence, the go to defence of "That's only a minority of them!" that people typically have for migrants is... well, wrong.
Regardless, it's not relevant to the question of whether the problem should be debated theologically or not.
There are, hypothetically, such a thing as Scientology moderates. It wouldn't make it a theological matter. Talking about the religion and its negative effect on reality and such. "What are the drawbacks of this existing?".
Well, they might be a large number of the migrants and almost half of muslims. Sure. Focus on them.
And Islam, or any world religion, is not comparable to Scientology. In structure, function, doctrine or anything else. Scientology is barely a religion. It distances itself from the term. Calling itself a form of alternative healing. It's not similar to Islam, Christianity or Judaism any more than really any highly centralized New Age Movement.
by Jochistan » Sun May 01, 2016 5:59 am
Ostroeuropa wrote:Jochistan wrote:Well, they might be a large number of the migrants and almost half of muslims. Sure. Focus on them.
And Islam, or any world religion, is not comparable to Scientology. In structure, function, doctrine or anything else. Scientology is barely a religion. It distances itself from the term. Calling itself a form of alternative healing. It's not similar to Islam, Christianity or Judaism any more than really any highly centralized New Age Movement.
That's what i'd prefer. How do you seperate them though? (Not the migrants.)
Fair enough about scientology.
by El-Amin Caliphate » Sun May 01, 2016 6:33 am
https://americanvision.org/948/theonomy-vs-theocracy/ wrote:God’s law cannot govern a nation where God’s law does not rule in the hearts of the people
Plaetopia wrote:Partly Free / Hybrid regime (score 4-6) El-Amin Caliphate (5.33)
by Kriga » Sun May 01, 2016 6:41 am
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:What France needs to do is teach refugees and Europeans about each other's culture and how each one lives so that they might understand each other.
by Kriga » Sun May 01, 2016 6:44 am
Jochistan wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:
Why bother debating the scripture of scientology when its patently nonsense, when you can simply point out that it's qualitatively different in social effects?
Debating theologically on it is giving it a level of credence. It has none.
Islam is no different.
It's adherents thinking otherwise is besides the point when it comes to demanding institutions, the public, and the media oppose these religions.
Come to think of it, Scientology is more compatible with the western world than Islam, because it just abuses its followers human rights, and infiltrates institutions to demand tax breaks, no different from a corporation there then.
It doesn't on top of that, result in shit blowing up, rape gangs, infiltrate institutions to drag them kicking and screaming back to the 9th century, and mutilate childrens genitals.
And Germany banned scientology.
Why not Islam?
The winged donkey is more credible than aliens?
If you say so.
If the religion is a regressive religion, then ofcourse it will effect the behavior of its adherents. That's why we're talking about it and them.
I think any one religion is as silly as any other, but only some of them cause public policy concerns due to the behavior and mentality of their adherents.
I think the real disrespect for muslims comes from the Islamophiles insisting they aren't a threat, who grossly underestimate the agency of determined individuals.
That's definately the case with some Muslims. I don't see why it's so hard to focus on the actual problem of fundamentalist.
Then again, you basically consider any Muslim less liberal than you to be a fundamentalist. So maybe theres not really a point in arguing.
by Holy German Realm » Sun May 01, 2016 6:53 am
by -The West Coast- » Sun May 01, 2016 7:01 am
by Reilor » Sun May 01, 2016 7:06 am
by El-Amin Caliphate » Sun May 01, 2016 7:07 am
https://americanvision.org/948/theonomy-vs-theocracy/ wrote:God’s law cannot govern a nation where God’s law does not rule in the hearts of the people
Plaetopia wrote:Partly Free / Hybrid regime (score 4-6) El-Amin Caliphate (5.33)
by El-Amin Caliphate » Sun May 01, 2016 7:09 am
Kriga wrote:El-Amin Caliphate wrote:What France needs to do is teach refugees and Europeans about each other's culture and how each one lives so that they might understand each other.
Or perhaps assimilation would work better. Being unified by one culture is better than having a multitude. The latter invites friction and potential tension. If Arab countries demand that a westerner follows their traditions, we may as well start trying to assimilate refugees to western values and standards.
Educating them to think critically would be a start, as well as introducing them to liberal trends. They cannot simply stick to their culture in another country. it won't work, and those who try and do it, usually end up witnessing their grandchildren become integrated with society. Of course, this doesn't happen all the time, since the Nationalists like to make things difficult with their constant whining and dogmatic belief that immigrants cannot be integrated.
We don't need to understand the refugees' culture. Why should we be forced to do that? We are not in their country, they are coming to ours. They should learn about us.
https://americanvision.org/948/theonomy-vs-theocracy/ wrote:God’s law cannot govern a nation where God’s law does not rule in the hearts of the people
Plaetopia wrote:Partly Free / Hybrid regime (score 4-6) El-Amin Caliphate (5.33)
by Kriga » Sun May 01, 2016 7:33 am
El-Amin Caliphate wrote:Kriga wrote:
Or perhaps assimilation would work better. Being unified by one culture is better than having a multitude. The latter invites friction and potential tension. If Arab countries demand that a westerner follows their traditions, we may as well start trying to assimilate refugees to western values and standards.
Educating them to think critically would be a start, as well as introducing them to liberal trends. They cannot simply stick to their culture in another country. it won't work, and those who try and do it, usually end up witnessing their grandchildren become integrated with society. Of course, this doesn't happen all the time, since the Nationalists like to make things difficult with their constant whining and dogmatic belief that immigrants cannot be integrated.
We don't need to understand the refugees' culture. Why should we be forced to do that? We are not in their country, they are coming to ours. They should learn about us.
That's cultural imperialism. If a country calls itself democratic, it must let people express themselves. Culture is one way of it. Besides, how do you expect people to throw away who they are? It not going to happen, so both sides must learn about one another.
by Waldriech » Sun May 01, 2016 7:36 am
by Federation of Allied States » Sun May 01, 2016 7:37 am
by The Alma Mater » Sun May 01, 2016 7:40 am
Federation of Allied States wrote:It seems Europe is slowly becoming more and more toxic to innocent muslims who have made their home there. This Islamophobia disgusts me.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aadhiris, Bovad, Corrian, Eahland, El Lazaro, Kostane, New Heldervinia, Ohnoh, Sarduri, Statesburg, Stratonesia, TETLANDIA, Theyra, Zantalio
Advertisement