Jedi Council wrote:It's called satire.
It's just a prank, bro.
Advertisement
by Salus Maior » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:13 pm
by HXVZ-07031017 » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:15 pm
by Jedi Council » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:17 pm
The Huskar Social Union wrote:Jedi Council is in fact, the big gay... The lord of all gays.
by Benuty » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:17 pm
Borderlands of Rojava wrote:Benuty wrote:I don't exactly fancy parents tossing their children into an open fire while priests wildly beat drums to drown out the childs horrific wailing as they burned to a crisp as the name of an old god is chanted merrily. The phoenicians, and by extensions Carthaginians were pretty brutal even by the standards of back then. Not to mention the Assyrians had a rather awful custom of wearing their enemies skin. The persians were arguably the best, but even they invented the incredible punishment of scaphism (which I can't link the wiki article from).
I still don't like Islam. If you wanna know what the middle east would look like under my watch, imagine an extra sinful Lebanon. Talking casinos everywhere, legal drugs, strippers, the hard Rock Cafe, and a gun shop with no limit on magazines. None of this religious gobblyguck and traditionalism. Kinda like what Trump America would look like if the donald got his wish to be a dictator.
by Salus Maior » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:18 pm
by Benuty » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:18 pm
Borderlands of Rojava wrote:HXVZ-07031017 wrote:"So allow time for the disbelievers. Leave them awhile."
This is the verse that I have been referring to. The terror attack was going against this verse.
Damn I thought it was gonna be something awful like "but if the child says 'you lack a brain and you're ugly,' cast him out off over a cliff."
by Jedi Council » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:20 pm
The Huskar Social Union wrote:Jedi Council is in fact, the big gay... The lord of all gays.
by Benuty » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:24 pm
by Jedi Council » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:27 pm
Benuty wrote:Jedi Council wrote:
Good, then we agree that Charlie Hebdo has every right to publish whatever images they like, be it a dancing Mohammed, Jesus In flagrante delicto, or Zues throwing a hussy fit.
I mean if you believe the myths about Hera, she was pretty mad at Zeus dating all those hussies.
The Huskar Social Union wrote:Jedi Council is in fact, the big gay... The lord of all gays.
by Kowani » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:35 pm
West Leas Oros 2 wrote:Don't lie to me. You know full well that the cause isn't "some cartoonists offended fundamentalists", and you know that it's ridiculous to claim that it was the cartoonists, rather than the terrorists who should have changed their behavior. You aren't "explaining the causes", you're shifting blame onto the victims and trying to hold them at fault. Perhaps you don't intend to, but you inadvertently have.
Benuty wrote:I don't exactly fancy parents tossing their children into an open fire while priests wildly beat drums to drown out the childs horrific wailing as they burned to a crisp as the name of an old god is chanted merrily. The phoenicians, and by extensions Carthaginians were pretty brutal even by the standards of back then. Not to mention the Assyrians had a rather awful custom of wearing their enemies skin. The persians were arguably the best, but even they invented the incredible punishment of scaphism (which I can't link the wiki article from).
by Northern Davincia » Wed Sep 02, 2020 9:39 pm
Kowani wrote:West Leas Oros 2 wrote:Don't lie to me. You know full well that the cause isn't "some cartoonists offended fundamentalists", and you know that it's ridiculous to claim that it was the cartoonists, rather than the terrorists who should have changed their behavior. You aren't "explaining the causes", you're shifting blame onto the victims and trying to hold them at fault. Perhaps you don't intend to, but you inadvertently have.
Wait, what? Do you...think they would've attacked if the cartoonists hadn't offended them?
Conserative Morality wrote:"Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Hoppe."
by The Alma Mater » Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:06 pm
Kowani wrote:West Leas Oros 2 wrote:Don't lie to me. You know full well that the cause isn't "some cartoonists offended fundamentalists", and you know that it's ridiculous to claim that it was the cartoonists, rather than the terrorists who should have changed their behavior. You aren't "explaining the causes", you're shifting blame onto the victims and trying to hold them at fault. Perhaps you don't intend to, but you inadvertently have.
Wait, what? Do you...think they would've attacked if the cartoonists hadn't offended them?
by The Alma Mater » Wed Sep 02, 2020 11:08 pm
Salus Maior wrote:Jedi Council wrote:Good.
All religions are given too many safe spaces; is this blasphemy against islam? Perhaps.
However, I dont believe that any of the writers at Charlie Hebdo are Islamic and thus are not bound to follow islamic custom or law.
If one wants to criticize something, they should criticize it and not make what are essentially troll posts to provoke a reaction.
I don't care for Islam much at all, I'm a huge critic of Islam. But this is just stomping on something that's sacred to a ton of people, in order to upset them, just because one can.
That's not a constructive step towards anything.
by Page » Thu Sep 03, 2020 12:49 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Salus Maior wrote:
If one wants to criticize something, they should criticize it and not make what are essentially troll posts to provoke a reaction.
I don't care for Islam much at all, I'm a huge critic of Islam. But this is just stomping on something that's sacred to a ton of people, in order to upset them, just because one can.
That's not a constructive step towards anything.
So do you oppose the call to prayer muslims shout through speakers every friday, which explicitly states other religions are false ?
I mean, if I were to stand in front of a mosque with a megaphone proclaiming Allah to be a false God they probably would be upset with me...
by Washington Resistance Army » Thu Sep 03, 2020 1:03 am
Page wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:
So do you oppose the call to prayer muslims shout through speakers every friday, which explicitly states other religions are false ?
I mean, if I were to stand in front of a mosque with a megaphone proclaiming Allah to be a false God they probably would be upset with me...
Declaring all other gods to be false is not an uncommon attribute of religion. In Judaism and Christianity it's literally the first commandment.
by The Alma Mater » Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:23 am
Page wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:
So do you oppose the call to prayer muslims shout through speakers every friday, which explicitly states other religions are false ?
I mean, if I were to stand in front of a mosque with a megaphone proclaiming Allah to be a false God they probably would be upset with me...
Declaring all other gods to be false is not an uncommon attribute of religion. In Judaism and Christianity it's literally the first commandment.
by Thermodolia » Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:39 am
Washington Resistance Army wrote:Insaanistan wrote:
The reason for that is women may go through something between the event and her testimony that may cause memory loss: pregnancy, which men don’t usually go through. Here are some articles: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... _08thdFLeR
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... 9JIobVf_aD
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q ... 3DWQojRXCt
Many scholars contend that if there was nothing to ruin her memory, the second there to remind her is not needed.
Women on average perform better than men in all memory categories. You feel like Muhammad would have known this if he actually was a prophet.
by Thermodolia » Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:41 am
by Thermodolia » Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:44 am
Insaanistan wrote:The Lone Alliance wrote:Here's the thing I don't really get, Muslims say it's wrong to draw a picture of Mohammed, if that's true, how the hell does anyone know what Mohammed looks like in the first place to claim it's a drawing of him?
If someone took a stick and stood it up against the wall and said "It's a statue of Mohammed" that doesn't make it so, all Muslims have to say is that it's a "Fake Mohammed".
Hell doesn't the rule itself only applies to Muslims because Mohammed didn't want Muslims worshipping him, I think it's very clear that Charlie Hebbo isn't drawing pictures of Mohammed to worship, so unless Muslims start bowing down and praying to the cartoons no sin has been committed.
We still don’t want people portraying him. Many Muslims don’t even like their picture taken (though it’s a minority, mainly in rural areas of the Middle East and South/Southeast Asia). Especially cartoons that are meant to ridicule him. Out of respect, you know?
by The Alma Mater » Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:46 am
Insaanistan wrote:Costa Fierro wrote:Charlie Hebdo: prints blatantly inflammatory cartoon
Radical Islamists: *kills Charlie Hebdo cartoonists for printing said cartoon*
Charlie Hebdo: prints it again
Can we just call them terrorists instead of Islamists. Islamists implies they are following Islamic principles.
by Great Mann » Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:55 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Insaanistan wrote:
Can we just call them terrorists instead of Islamists. Islamists implies they are following Islamic principles.
They claim they do and surprisingly few muslims openly disagree.
Heck, if tens of thousands of muslims go out to riot on the street when some western rag they never heard of publishes some cartoons of Muhammed, it is pretty hard to maintain they do not represent a significant group.
Focus: None selected
| Se Morgenspel | COVID: 231K infected - 9,751+ dead // Holy orders and organisations of faith continue their efforts to aid the destitute in cooperation with government citizen and resident welfare agencies // Holidaymaker in Australia attacked by shark while swimming with family, declared dead upon arrival at nearest hospital // Black author Æþelƿulf Mohamet Turǣġ passes at age 71; Har Turǣġ authored many widely-regraded essays and historiographic treatises.
by Insaanistan » Thu Sep 03, 2020 3:59 am
New haven america wrote:Insaanistan wrote:
Did you... even read any of them. Please, tell me where it what I said says any of that.
Where do you wanna start? All women are apparently always pregnant so due to pregnancy brain their word is worth less than a man's? Women are incapable of taking care of themselves so they must rely on men? A good woman is obedient to her father/husband? Beating women is totally ok under the guise of "Being corrected/disciplined"?
by Insaanistan » Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:02 am
West Leas Oros 2 wrote:Insaanistan wrote:Statistics show most “Islamists” were young people who don’t aren’t very religious (hence why terrorists can make them believe the Qur’ân says what it does not so easily), and that more mosques and higher mosque attendance means less terrorists.
Where are these statistics?
by Insaanistan » Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:04 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Insaanistan wrote:
Can we just call them terrorists instead of Islamists. Islamists implies they are following Islamic principles.
They claim they do and surprisingly few muslims openly disagree.
Heck, if tens of thousands of muslims go out to riot on the street when some western rag they never heard of publishes some cartoons of Muhammed, it is pretty hard to maintain they do not represent a significant group.
by Insaanistan » Thu Sep 03, 2020 4:05 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Anhalt Dessau, Assassins BrotherHoodd, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Castelia, Corporate Collective Salvation, Emotional Support Crocodile, Fort Viorlia, Ifreann, Lycom, Nimzonia, Reantreet, Reventus Koth, Sarduri
Advertisement