Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: geoffr70 on 10 September 2010, 14:06:14
-
I don't necessarily support this, but does it not hi-light the fact that many muslims are the ones with double standards, are not tolerant, and that they take hyprocracy to a whole new level.
They don't need the symbolic burning of a Koran to resort to killing innocent people, in the name of their 'religion'. They will do it anyway.
They choose to be offended. They are muslims, we are not, so I have no respect for their Mohammed, or their attitude towards women, and their little value for life.
Why does Tony Blair encourage us to read the Koran, instead of burning it? Why do the so called leaders not spend more time defending our way of life, culture, values and beliefs (religious or otherwise), instead of rallying to the defence of muslims, who choose to be offended and have a victim mentality, and whose ultimate goal is to subjugate, convert, or kill non muslims?
I think it is about time we say a big group no to their behaviour, whether that's a political, economic, diplomatic no, or military no (I've done my time getting bombed, mortared, rpg'd, stoned, bricked, shot at).
The arrogance of it all is unreal. I'm all for people having rights, but IMO it's gone way too far. I'm all for freedom of expression, speech and association. So what if someone is offended by the views or beliefs of someone else! We're all adults living in a big nasty world, you won't agree with everyone all the time, muslims need to take this onboard.
I should add I have nothing against muslims, or any particular group, just the fact that some of them think they are more deserving than others, when they are not.
-
I have a strange feeling there wont be too many replies to this what ever peoples opinions are ;D.
The racist card will be flashed up at anyone stating an opinion either way :-/
-
The burning has all been called off, thank God! 8-) 8-) 8-)
Many lives were going to be put at risk whatever you may think of the subject.
Apart from that :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X
-
I don't think its fair to tar all Muslims with the same brush and insinuate they are all terrorists. I'm sure its equally unfair to call all Christians during the Crusades as terrorists. Not all 1930s Germans were Nazis.
With any part of society, its the extremists that cause the issues, be it Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Prodestents.
Seeing as this is likely to get the racists all chaffing at the bit, I'll watch this thread carefully, and anyone, on either side of any argument, that severely oversteps the line may find themselves without an OOF account. So feel free to debate, but seriously think about who you may upset before pressing the Post button ;)
-
And before slagging off the Koran, I would suggest tackling the more mainstream versions of it - I had to read it at school back in the mid 1980s.
I also think Jews should read the New Testiment, Christians pay more attention to Old Testiment, we all should attempt to understand the principles of Hindu and so on.
If we all had an understanding of different faiths, and were more tolerant, it would leave less religion for the extremists to hide behind ;)
-
The burning has all been called off, thank God! 8-) 8-) 8-)
Many lives were going to be put at risk whatever you may think of the subject.
Apart from that :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X
Im glad the pistol toting preacher has called it off as well .
Its just madness and would cause real trouble :o
Otherwise im with you on this one :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X
-
I have a strange feeling there wont be too many replies to this what ever peoples opinions are ;D.
The racist card will be flashed up at anyone stating an opinion either way :-/
I think that is part of the problem though. It is absolutely not racist to discuss these issues, or make constructive criticism. We are brainwashed into believing that 'You can't say that' or 'You can't say this'. Who says? I would like to meet them, I think this new Pseudo-religion of Equality and Diversity, imposed on us, is all one sided. We are all told to abide by it under pain of losing your job, castigation and being ostracised.
I'm not tarring all muslims with the same brush. Why don't these 'moderate muslims' do more to say 'that's not us and not what we believe'?
I'm pretty sure I would.
-
constructive criticism
Thats the problem, its rarely constructive
Why don't these 'moderate muslims' do more to say 'that's not us and not what we believe'?
I suspect they do try, but a lot of people in our society are vegetables, and believe whatever story the BBC chooses to sensationalise that day, and the BBC cannot sensationalise mainstream/moderate believers - always a better story to get people with extreme views ;)
-
geoff you do ask important questions and their answers are historically deep.. however I must simply give the answer..
politics and religion are two very good friends from the begining of history.. and they both use each other in every opportunity.. :(
now , in order to analyse the situtation we must be aware of some facts..
* many politicians in order to have more power, abuse religion everytime even if thats a republic or a kingdom.. as it means millions of votes..
* religion by its nature is very prone to abuse as its originally a series of god given laws to arrange human life..
so saying to be secular or trying to be secular in real terms has no meaning imo.. as an experience I can say including many western countries and middle east countries secularity is nothing more than a talk or something only on paper.. there are millions of examples which prooves that a country saying secular in reality is not..
actually religion is the one which is mostly the winner.. >:(
now other facts:
* especially in middle east countries religion is a serious means of earning money.. if you start to demonstrate
yourself a religious person you will have many people around you helping in every possible way..
* now if you have ever had the chance of reading those books especially the one you mentioned
you will see that it has some sayings that can seriously start a war.. However after two thousand years anybody
who accepts those statements serious and acct accordingly must be handled seperately from community imo..
* however adding to the complexity of problem some west and some developed middle east countries
obviously pump more fuel to the fire.. you can guess who they are..
now explaining my position , I do believe neither of those books.. they are from the past, may be valid in their day
and some of their rules may apply to this day but actually cant help manage my life in this century..
now about the subject of burning those books.. nope.. wont help solve nothing..instead will start a big fight between
the believers of those religions and western world.. and bring ultra trouble..
and a final fact:
* I think some western countries must stop helping those religious fundemantalists (also here) or
they will get many copies of iran in middle east..
-
If we all had an understanding of different faiths, and were more tolerant, it would leave less religion for the extremists to hide behind ;)
Agreed.
Enlightenment through education and understanding is the basic tenet of tolerance towards others and their beliefs - even if those beliefs are difficult to accept and run counter to the observer’s moral quotient.
Those who possess the will and capacity to understand are often the first to be castigated and suppressed when despotic individuals wish to assume control or influence over their lives.
Only in the breeding grounds of ignorance and apathy can hatred and malevolence be nurtured and set free to blight the lives of the many.
-
The burning has all been called off, thank God! 8-) 8-) 8-)
Many lives were going to be put at risk whatever you may think of the subject.
Apart from that :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X :-X
I would certainly agree with that Lizzie. :y
-
If we all had an understanding of different faiths, and were more tolerant, it would leave less religion for the extremists to hide behind ;)
Agreed.
Enlightenment through education and understanding is the basic tenet of tolerance towards others and their beliefs - even if those beliefs are difficult to accept and run counter to the observer’s moral quotient.
Those who possess the will and capacity to understand are often the first to be castigated and suppressed when despotic individuals wish to assume control or influence over their lives.
Only in the breeding grounds of ignorance and apathy can hatred and malevolence be nurtured and set free to blight the lives of the many.
explanation and translation please .. really I dont understand anything ;D ;D :y
-
If we all had an understanding of different faiths, and were more tolerant, it would leave less religion for the extremists to hide behind ;)
Agreed.
Enlightenment through education and understanding is the basic tenet of tolerance towards others and their beliefs - even if those beliefs are difficult to accept and run counter to the observer’s moral quotient.
Those who possess the will and capacity to understand are often the first to be castigated and suppressed when despotic individuals wish to assume control or influence over their lives.
Only in the breeding grounds of ignorance and apathy can hatred and malevolence be nurtured and set free to blight the lives of the many.
explanation and translation please .. really I dont understand anything ;D ;D :y
I don't want understanding of islam or other religions, nor do many other people I suspect. Not that I'm against it, I would say the same about many other religions and ideologies.
Religion, should you choose to follow one, and abide by it's rules, is a personal decision for you and you alone. By making this choice, one should do it with the fact that other people haven't, in mind. It just seems that while most of us can live and let live, they are certain groups that can't. I don't want to know about Islam, (nor other religions), so why does the BBC and other production companies try to appease muslims by putting on pro muslim programs (yes there are muslims in Britain so they are perfectly entitled to have programs just like anyone else), but through my experience I have to take a cynical view.
Another point, is that how can one of the main target groups of 'Equality and Diversity', not embrace and uphold what it stands for?
Just a point to note, contrary to what people might think, I'm not racist in the slightest, I can and do speak to anyone/give them the time of day, but I think alot of people now are sick of the sob stories of certain groups.
-
Where's Banjax? He could mock all those who believe in fairy stories. And I could join him. :y
-
I don't necessarily support this, but does it not hi-light the fact that many muslims are the ones with double standards, are not tolerant, and that they take hyprocracy to a whole new level.
Would it be reasonable to expect the many followers of Islam who hold the Holy Quran in such high regard not to be offended by this outrageous act but can they really be held to account by the actions and fundamentalist beliefs predicated by a modest number (in global terms) of their fellow ‘believers’?
They don't need the symbolic burning of a Koran to resort to killing innocent people, in the name of their 'religion'. They will do it anyway.
I assume you refer to the more fundamentalist followers of Islam rather than the main stream - should you not be then surely that's a vast generalisation?
They choose to be offended. They are muslims, we are not, so I have no respect for their Mohammed, or their attitude towards women, and their little value for life.
Do you really understand the teachings of the Prophet, Geoff? And does your attitude towards the followers not display similar intolerance?
Why does Tony Blair encourage us to read the Koran, instead of burning it? Why do the so called leaders not spend more time defending our way of life, culture, values and beliefs (religious or otherwise), instead of rallying to the defence of muslims, who choose to be offended and have a victim mentality, and whose ultimate goal is to subjugate, convert, or kill non muslims?
Again Geoff I consider this to be a vast generalisation - are you suggesting all the followers of Islam are this way inclined.
The musings of a discredited politician such as Mr Blair are irrelevant although I do agree with you that people in this country should be proud of their heritage and stand firm for the right to express their own beliefs without fear of retribution
I think it is about time we say a big group no to their behaviour, whether that's a political, economic, diplomatic no, or military no (I've done my time getting bombed, mortared, rpg'd, stoned, bricked, shot at).
To my mind you are considering this from a rather simplistic perspective Geoff, the practice of politics at national and international level demands clear, considered and above all strategic thinking. Adopting the 'balls-out' approach would be foolhardy and, we can see what ill-considered military action relevant to this 'problem' has brought us.
The arrogance of it all is unreal. I'm all for people having rights, but IMO it's gone way too far. I'm all for freedom of expression, speech and association. So what if someone is offended by the views or beliefs of someone else! We're all adults living in a big nasty world, you won't agree with everyone all the time, muslims need to take this onboard.
Are you suggesting that those standing up for their beliefs are being arrogant in this case Geoff - surely not?
I would have thought the sign of a mature democracy (insofar as we have one) is the ability of the system to embrace the many differences found in those making up its citizenry and allow them to flourish under the law.
I should add I have nothing against muslims, or any particular group, just the fact that some of them think they are more deserving than others, when they are not.
The fact that you say you don't have anything against the followers of Islam should encourage those followers of the faith presently reading this correspondence to believe that tolerance and understanding is alive and thriving in the UK.
-
Who is prophet Geoff?
-
Who is prophet Geoff?
Prophet Geoff? The man who says what the majority think but won't say. That's him. :y
-
If we all had an understanding of different faiths, and were more tolerant, it would leave less religion for the extremists to hide behind ;)
Agreed.
Enlightenment through education and understanding is the basic tenet of tolerance towards others and their beliefs - even if those beliefs are difficult to accept and run counter to the observer’s moral quotient.
Those who possess the will and capacity to understand are often the first to be castigated and suppressed when despotic individuals wish to assume control or influence over their lives.
Only in the breeding grounds of ignorance and apathy can hatred and malevolence be nurtured and set free to blight the lives of the many.
explanation and translation please .. really I dont understand anything ;D ;D :y
Certainly cem.
If an individual is oppressed and made ignorant through radicalisation or the lack of education, then it's more likely they will fall victim to the will of those who would wish to control both them and their environment.
-
I would agree that having some understanding of religious texts may enable me to talk some fanatics out of extremist actions but there are a lot of them (texts) and I only have one life! :)
On the subject of the geezer in the USA I have two observations:
1) He is deliberately trying to provoke some other group of people and that is silly. I confess I don't live where he is so don't understand his reasoning - there is room for a few nutters in the world so I would like to let him be.
2) I'm given to understand that he is a leader of about 50 people. Now if they all agreed with him it's still only 50 people. Why can't he talk his inflammatory stuff to 50 people without it being re-broadcast to 500 million (my estimate). If he was given the cold-shoulder then none of the likely-to-be-offended parties would have ever known about this.
Stupid people. >:( >:(
-
If we all had an understanding of different faiths, and were more tolerant, it would leave less religion for the extremists to hide behind ;)
Agreed.
Enlightenment through education and understanding is the basic tenet of tolerance towards others and their beliefs - even if those beliefs are difficult to accept and run counter to the observer’s moral quotient.
Those who possess the will and capacity to understand are often the first to be castigated and suppressed when despotic individuals wish to assume control or influence over their lives.
Only in the breeding grounds of ignorance and apathy can hatred and malevolence be nurtured and set free to blight the lives of the many.
explanation and translation please .. really I dont understand anything ;D ;D :y
Certainly cem.
If an individual is oppressed and made ignorant through radicalisation or the lack of education, then it's more likely they will fall victim to the will of those who would wish to control both them and their environment.
Also, if an individual is educated enough to become aware that he is being oppressed, and protests, he will still fall victim to the state.
-
Who is prophet Geoff?
Thank you, comma added.
-
Just as an aside: If the media ignored this idiot, the problem would never have arisen.
I firmly believe that world war three will not be started by some rogue state with a nuclear device, but by an over-zealous reporter. ;D
-
Just as an aside: If the media ignored this idiot, the problem would never have arisen.
I firmly believe that world war three will not be started by some rogue state with a nuclear device, but by an over-zealous reporter. ;D
You backing away from that one then Steve? ;D ;D
-
Just as an aside: If the media ignored this idiot, the problem would never have arisen.
I firmly believe that world war three will not be started by some rogue state with a nuclear device, but by an over-zealous reporter. ;D
You backing away from that one then Steve? ;D ;D
Certainly not! ::)
-
If we all had an understanding of different faiths, and were more tolerant, it would leave less religion for the extremists to hide behind ;)
Agreed.
Enlightenment through education and understanding is the basic tenet of tolerance towards others and their beliefs - even if those beliefs are difficult to accept and run counter to the observer’s moral quotient.
Those who possess the will and capacity to understand are often the first to be castigated and suppressed when despotic individuals wish to assume control or influence over their lives.
Only in the breeding grounds of ignorance and apathy can hatred and malevolence be nurtured and set free to blight the lives of the many.
explanation and translation please .. really I dont understand anything ;D ;D :y
Certainly cem.
If an individual is oppressed and made ignorant through radicalisation or the lack of education, then it's more likely they will fall victim to the will of those who would wish to control both them and their environment.
thanks Zulu.. I think here is nearly 35 million people who needs to visualize the meaning of this sentence.. :y :y
-
methinks that ALL those of a religious persuation should be forced to read Richard Dawkins's "The God Delusion" ;D.Seriously though, he makes some excellent and coherent arguments there, especially against cultures such as the middle east's extreme forms of Islam and Americas bible belt where "respect" for their religions is taken overboard in an unquestioning manner. The truth is that noone is born a catholic/muslim or whatever (not in the sense that they are born male/female or of a particular skin colour), they are children that have been indoctrinated into that faith. Therefore, as with political beliefs, religious beliefs should-indeed must-be challenged. Cue Lennon's "Imagine"....(the line "and no religion too " is often doctored when/if played in the bible belt)
-
methinks that ALL those of a religious persuation should be forced to read Richard Dawkins's "The God Delusion" ;D.Seriously though, he makes some excellent and coherent arguments there, especially against cultures such as the middle east's extreme forms of Islam and Americas bible belt where "respect" for their religions is taken overboard in an unquestioning manner. The truth is that noone is born a catholic/muslim or whatever (not in the sense that they are born male/female or of a particular skin colour), they are children that have been indoctrinated into that faith. Therefore, as with political beliefs, religious beliefs should-indeed must-be challenged. Cue Lennon's "Imagine"....(the line "and no religion too " is often doctored when/if played in the bible belt)
Mr Dawkins seems more fervently religious about his so-called secularism than the majority of English people.
As for reasonable, I glimpsed him on his tele program the other night and he was going on about how humans are inherently nice to one another under all the cover! What planet does he live on? :-/
-
I think TB hit the nail on the head. The problem here is the sensationalist press. This bloke has a congregation of 50 people, this time last week, few people outside of his own family knew who he was. Now thanks to the media who have to fill their 24 hour rolling news programmes with something, he is one of the most famous people in the world.
On the one hand I think that a section of American Muslims are trying to see how far they can push the boundaries (sound familiar ?) by building a Mosque close to ground zero - and I think they should be stopped in their tracks, and on the other hand we have this idiot who is playing right into the hands of extremists and acting as a one man propoganda campaign and recruiting seargant for them.
Still, he has got himself his 15 minutes of fame, but I hope he can sleep at night when there is the inevitable surge in violence against U.S. forces, on the back of what he has done.
-
methinks that ALL those of a religious persuation should be forced to read Richard Dawkins's "The God Delusion" ;D.Seriously though, he makes some excellent and coherent arguments there, especially against cultures such as the middle east's extreme forms of Islam and Americas bible belt where "respect" for their religions is taken overboard in an unquestioning manner. The truth is that noone is born a catholic/muslim or whatever (not in the sense that they are born male/female or of a particular skin colour), they are children that have been indoctrinated into that faith. Therefore, as with political beliefs, religious beliefs should-indeed must-be challenged. Cue Lennon's "Imagine"....(the line "and no religion too " is often doctored when/if played in the bible belt)
Mr Dawkins seems more fervently religious about his so-called secularism than the majority of English people.
As for reasonable, I glimpsed him on his tele program the other night and he was going on about how humans are inherently nice to one another under all the cover! What planet does he live on? :-/
yeh, well you (sadly)have point there mate :(
-
I don't do religion of any description & i find most regilous people to be hypocrites.
They think that their religion is better than yours & you should follow their way of life.
I'm glad to be neutral, my beliefs are that we should ALL just get along, but unfortunatley we ALL don't.
We've always gone to war over beliefs & i guess (as sad as it is) we always will.
Just DON'T come knocking at my door & expecting me to conform with what you have to say, because you'll find a very unwelcome greeting.
No matter what you worship keep it to your selves & everyone would be alot happier.
-
Wasn't going to get involved in this one, but I have to go along with Pete.
I don't do religion of any sort, I don't do church, unless dragged screaming for weddings or funerals, christenings.
However, as Pete states, if you want to, then its your business....But don't try to press it on me. :y
When I moved into this house 35 years ago, most of the other inhabitants of the road were members of a religious order, if thats the right phrase. Not once, have any of them tried to 'convert me' in any way shape or form, and we all have a great social relationship ;) Thats how it should be.
Live and let live....but it won't happen, as someone always tries to be tops >:( ..........and the brainwashed follow !!!!!!
-
I thought about starting a thread on this topic a few days ago and decided against it... But now it's started ::)
I make no bones about my religious position, I am agnostic.
I believe in "A divine being" but it's not a (wo)man on a cloud or a multi-armed, elephant like creature. I am a member of an organisation where people of all religions stand side by side and acknowledge a "Divine Being" together (some people will no doubt know what I mean ::)) Organised Religion isn't for me... I just don't buy it! It's my opinion and I don't force it on anyone else ;)
As for burning the Koran... I find it disgraceful that anyone, let alone a Religious Leader, thinks it is acceptable! I may not agree with that religion but I still respect people who do, as long as they also respect my and other peoples views. The Burning would have just been inciting a lot of violence >:( >:(
Equally, I think it is important to acknowledge the date tomorrow and remember the many people who have lost their lives to terrorism/"terrorism related" wars ;)
Unfortunately, there isn't enough understanding in the world. I agree that the building of a "Muslim Religious Centre and Mosque" on the site of the Twin Towers is equally as disrespectful as Burning the Koran. But not everyone sees it that way ::) ::)
Anyway... I think I have been fair, open and non-racist/insulting in my post. I, obviously, have strong feelings and more to say but it wouldn't come across correctly as the written word so I shall stop here :y :y
-
I don't think its fair to tar all Muslims with the same brush and insinuate they are all terrorists. I'm sure its equally unfair to call all Christians during the Crusades as terrorists. Not all 1930s Germans were Nazis.
With any part of society, its the extremists that cause the issues, be it Muslims, Jews, Catholics, Prodestents.
Nail on the head
-
Whenever entrenched positions are taken the end result is usually the same.
Violence is the natural bedfellow of xenophobia, intolerance and lack of understanding.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_Vll-t0H6A[/media]
-
I threw two copies in the skip a few weeks ago. I was clearing the student accommodation I have in Liverpool and they were left behind. My way of thinking was if the person who owned them forgot them, then they couldn't have been that important to him, so in the skip they went.
-
I threw two copies in the skip a few weeks ago. I was clearing the student accommodation I have in Liverpool and they were left behind. My way of thinking was if the person who owned them forgot them, then they couldn't have been that important to him, so in the skip they went.
And that is a completely fair point of view... I would have done the same ;) To extend that, I would have thrown out copies of the Bible too :y
-
I threw two copies in the skip a few weeks ago. I was clearing the student accommodation I have in Liverpool and they were left behind. My way of thinking was if the person who owned them forgot them, then they couldn't have been that important to him, so in the skip they went.
And that is a completely fair point of view... I would have done the same ;) To extend that, I would have thrown out copies of the Bible too :y
I would have Ebayed them!!!!
-
I don't necessarily support this, but does it not hi-light the fact that many muslims are the ones with double standards, are not tolerant, and that they take hyprocracy to a whole new level.
Would it be reasonable to expect the many followers of Islam who hold the Holy Quran in such high regard not to be offended by this outrageous act but can they really be held to account by the actions and fundamentalist beliefs predicated by a modest number (in global terms) of their fellow ‘believers’?
They don't need the symbolic burning of a Koran to resort to killing innocent people, in the name of their 'religion'. They will do it anyway.
I assume you refer to the more fundamentalist followers of Islam rather than the main stream - should you not be then surely that's a vast generalisation?
They choose to be offended. They are muslims, we are not, so I have no respect for their Mohammed, or their attitude towards women, and their little value for life.
Do you really understand the teachings of the Prophet, Geoff? And does your attitude towards the followers not display similar intolerance?
Why does Tony Blair encourage us to read the Koran, instead of burning it? Why do the so called leaders not spend more time defending our way of life, culture, values and beliefs (religious or otherwise), instead of rallying to the defence of muslims, who choose to be offended and have a victim mentality, and whose ultimate goal is to subjugate, convert, or kill non muslims?
Again Geoff I consider this to be a vast generalisation - are you suggesting all the followers of Islam are this way inclined.
The musings of a discredited politician such as Mr Blair are irrelevant although I do agree with you that people in this country should be proud of their heritage and stand firm for the right to express their own beliefs without fear of retribution
I think it is about time we say a big group no to their behaviour, whether that's a political, economic, diplomatic no, or military no (I've done my time getting bombed, mortared, rpg'd, stoned, bricked, shot at).
To my mind you are considering this from a rather simplistic perspective Geoff, the practice of politics at national and international level demands clear, considered and above all strategic thinking. Adopting the 'balls-out' approach would be foolhardy and, we can see what ill-considered military action relevant to this 'problem' has brought us.
The arrogance of it all is unreal. I'm all for people having rights, but IMO it's gone way too far. I'm all for freedom of expression, speech and association. So what if someone is offended by the views or beliefs of someone else! We're all adults living in a big nasty world, you won't agree with everyone all the time, muslims need to take this onboard.
Are you suggesting that those standing up for their beliefs are being arrogant in this case Geoff - surely not?
I would have thought the sign of a mature democracy (insofar as we have one) is the ability of the system to embrace the many differences found in those making up its citizenry and allow them to flourish under the law.
I should add I have nothing against muslims, or any particular group, just the fact that some of them think they are more deserving than others, when they are not.
The fact that you say you don't have anything against the followers of Islam should encourage those followers of the faith presently reading this correspondence to believe that tolerance and understanding is alive and thriving in the UK.
Some big words here. I fink i mite av 2 get mi dikshunary to no what they meen
-
Some big words here. I fink i mite av 2 get mi dikshunary to no what they meen
Aah, thank you Geoff for the considered response :y - very disappointing indeed :( :(
How should have I phrased my legitimate questions to your piece? Is there anything wrong with my using this language?
Would you like to make a serious point?
-
Where's Banjax? He could mock all those who believe in fairy stories. And I could join him. :y
:o
as if I'd ever castigate anyone's beliefs...........Fairytale or otherwise :o :o :o ;)
Now, if you'll excuse me, the Big Giant Head is calling :y
-
Some big words here. I fink i mite av 2 get mi dikshunary to no what they meen
Aah, thank you Geoff for the considered response :y - very disappointing indeed :( :(
How should have I phrased my legitimate questions to your piece? Is there anything wrong with my using this language?
Would you like to make a serious point?
It seems that whenever someone makes a legitimate point, or exercises their freedom of speech to assert their beliefs, such as my mainstream, moderate and non-prejudiced beliefs, numerous people rally round to tell them how wrong and nasty they are! They pick holes in their statements, twisting words, trying to belittle them and show them up. This I think partly proves the point I was making in my original post, thanks!
You ask me :
"Are you suggesting all the followers of Islam are this way inclined?"
Which proves my point again! For the sake of convenience and server space posts are kept short(ish). You really think I tar everyone with the same brush, or are you just trying to show me up, which again, would prove my point! There is good and bad everywhere!
Do you understand the alleged teachings of the alleged prophet they call Mohammed? Or do you interpret them the way you see fit? There is a big difference.
Sorry Zulu77, I don't know what a balls out approach is.
A few years ago I was confronted by a 'Stop the War' protestor! He asked me to sign their petition to 'stop the war' and get the troops out! After telling him the war stopped along time ago, I said I think there should be more troops out there. He then told me, and I quote:
"You should get back there and ******* die!"
I consider myself reasonably resilient, this was still annoying however, after seeing good people burnt to a crisp, blown to bits, and shot in the face, and having a few close encounters of the last kind myself!!! Lol If I was predisposed to violence, I might've taught him a lesson, he needed it!
This I think is an example of how people, who don't know what they are talking about, commenting on the issue. I'm not just talking about serviceman being killed an injured here. I'm talking about the normal people who want to live a normal life, but are subjected to a stunted way of life because of others.
And if you think we live in a democracy, I think you are sadly mistaken!
-
And before slagging off the Koran, I would suggest tackling the more mainstream versions of it - I had to read it at school back in the mid 1980s.
Was you given a choice...i know the Jerhova witness at are scholl was shunned by both teachers and children alike becuase he dare say no.
If we all had an understanding of different faiths, and were more tolerant, it would leave less religion for the extremists to hide behind ;)
Sadly they would just twist it even futher (religion that is) and still use it too there own means.
-
Some big words here. I fink i mite av 2 get mi dikshunary to no what they meen
Aah, thank you Geoff for the considered response :y - very disappointing indeed :( :(
How should have I phrased my legitimate questions to your piece? Is there anything wrong with my using this language?
Would you like to make a serious point?
It seems that whenever someone makes a legitimate point, or exercises their freedom of speech to assert their beliefs, such as my mainstream, moderate and non-prejudiced beliefs, numerous people rally round to tell them how wrong and nasty they are! They pick holes in their statements, twisting words, trying to belittle them and show them up. This I think partly proves the point I was making in my original post, thanks!
You ask me :
"Are you suggesting all the followers of Islam are this way inclined?"
Which proves my point again! For the sake of convenience and server space posts are kept short(ish). You really think I tar everyone with the same brush, or are you just trying to show me up, which again, would prove my point! There is good and bad everywhere!
Do you understand the alleged teachings of the alleged prophet they call Mohammed? Or do you interpret them the way you see fit? There is a big difference.
Sorry Zulu77, I don't know what a balls out approach is.
A few years ago I was confronted by a 'Stop the War' protestor! He asked me to sign their petition to 'stop the war' and get the troops out! After telling him the war stopped along time ago, I said I think there should be more troops out there. He then told me, and I quote:
"You should get back there and ******* die!"
I consider myself reasonably resilient, this was still annoying however, after seeing good people burnt to a crisp, blown to bits, and shot in the face, and having a few close encounters of the last kind myself!!! Lol If I was predisposed to violence, I might've taught him a lesson, he needed it!
This I think is an example of how people, who don't know what they are talking about, commenting on the issue. I'm not just talking about serviceman being killed an injured here. I'm talking about the normal people who want to live a normal life, but are subjected to a stunted way of life because of others.
And if you think we live in a democracy, I think you are sadly mistaken!
Thank you for making some serious points Geoff.
It seems that whenever someone makes a legitimate point, or exercises their freedom of speech to assert their beliefs, such as my mainstream, moderate and non-prejudiced beliefs, numerous people rally round to tell them how wrong and nasty they are! They pick holes in their statements, twisting words, trying to belittle them and show them up. This I think partly proves the point I was making in my original post, thanks!
Were you not inviting comment by starting this thread (in the way you constructed your opening remarks) or did not expect people to examine your argument and make some comments of their own?
How can asking questions to clarify a point be construed as picking holes and belittling - do you feel that your assertions should go unchallenged. :-?
"Are you suggesting all the followers of Islam are this way inclined?
This was put to you in response to the following statement;
instead of rallying to the defence of muslims, who choose to be offended and have a victim mentality, and whose ultimate goal is to subjugate, convert, or kill non muslims?
Should I have not asked you to clarify that point?
Do you understand the alleged teachings of the alleged prophet they call Mohammed? Or do you interpret them the way you see fit? There is a big difference.
As a matter of fact I don't Geoff but I'm not prepared to condemn something because of my ignorance of it. Your use of the word alleged in the above seems to suggest that you have a particular mindset.
I don't know what a balls out approach is.
Full on, care less of consequences, all-out.
I consider myself reasonably resilient, this was still annoying however, after seeing good people burnt to a crisp, blown to bits, and shot in the face, and having a few close encounters of the last kind myself
You may be interested to know Geoff that during the course of my service to the state I've been shot at, bombed, stabbed (twice) targeted for assassination on quite a number of occasions, spat upon and called a 'filthy British blank' who should 'blank off' back to where I belonged and so on.
It would have been a missed opportunity had I not tried to understand why people decided to act this way towards me (and my colleagues).
Through understanding and adopting an open-minded approach many situations can be dealt in a way that benefits most of the protagonists.
And if you think we live in a democracy, I think you are sadly mistaken!
I would submit that we are Geoff. It’s far from perfect, but I would suggest that each and every one of us would know about it if we were not.
I would finally make the point that I'm not talking down to you or anyone else here for that matter. It's not in my nature to do this.
This is how I correspond on a day to day basis and for me to try and deconstruct how I phrase my writings, would be an insult to the membership here.
In spite of the many points I asked you to clarify, you may be surprised to learn that I agree with some points you make more that you would imagine.
-
RIGHT THEN.... The term Pikey ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
(I still think the reason that muslims take there shoes off when going into the mosque is cos they have a great big bouncy castle in there !!)
So what about the flag burning that was so popular just after 9/11 ?
Quote "I don't think its fair to tar all Muslims with the same brush and insinuate they are all terrorists"
But.... All terrorists ARE muslims, but boy do they complain when they get searched at the airport... and be totaly honest would you be a little bit uneasy sitting next to one on a plane ?
-
RIGHT THEN.... The term Pikey ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
(I still think the reason that muslims take there shoes off when going into the mosque is cos they have a great big bouncy castle in there !!)
So what about the flag burning that was so popular just after 9/11 ?
Where would we be without the Indomitable British Humour? :-/ ::)
-
RIGHT THEN.... The term Pikey ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
(I still think the reason that muslims take there shoes off when going into the mosque is cos they have a great big bouncy castle in there !!)
So what about the flag burning that was so popular just after 9/11 ?
Where would we be without the Indomitable British Humour? :-/ ::)
could give the opposing sides a feather pillow each and let them sort the issues out that way.
-
... Maybe if the chineese went into Afghanistan.. I think you would just hear a noise like "fetzz"... and google maps would just show a splat mark where it used to be - Plus they dont have the greatest human rights record - Guantanamo bay would look like butlins in comparison !
-
But.... All terrorists ARE muslims
IRA are Muslims :o
ETA?
What a load of popycock >:(
-
Ok... point taken - But recently and in many numbers !
-
Ok... point taken - But recently and in many numbers !
Presumably you have access to the statistics then, as I'm sure you're intelligent enough not to take much notice of mainstream media?
Obviously, if a Western country(s) invade 2 Islamic states, there are going to be an awful lot of angry people...
-
Obviously, if a Western country(s) invade 2 Islamic states, there are going to be an awful lot of angry people...
IMHO maybe they should have done a better job !
Yep it's about 1% - Of a uk population of 2,065,012
It took 4 to fly a plane into each of the twin towers - based on that they have the capacity to kill, mame or genraly spiol the day of 8260000 infidels.... beats anything ETA, the IRA or the peoples popular front of judea ever did....
-
WOW interesting stuff, as is the conspiracy thread. I have many opinions both on this and the other but I choose for the moment at least to remain at the back of the class and watch.....
But, would as much fuss have been made if a Muslim was burning a Bible?
-
WOW interesting stuff, as is the conspiracy thread. I have many opinions both on this and the other but I choose for the moment at least to remain at the back of the class and watch.....
But, would as much fuss have been made if a Muslim was burning a Bible?
I'm sure they have, and the press have refrained from printing it
-
WOW interesting stuff, as is the conspiracy thread. I have many opinions both on this and the other but I choose for the moment at least to remain at the back of the class and watch.....
But, would as much fuss have been made if a Muslim was burning a Bible?
I'm sure they have, and the press have refrained from printing it
Totally off subject, but I fear that the Press are responsible for exaggerating so many things in todays society, and I should add the Internet, that causes even more problems....... :(
-
WOW interesting stuff, as is the conspiracy thread. I have many opinions both on this and the other but I choose for the moment at least to remain at the back of the class and watch.....
But, would as much fuss have been made if a Muslim was burning a Bible?
I'm sure they have, and the press have refrained from printing it
Totally off subject, but I fear that the Press are responsible for exaggerating so many things in todays society, and I should add the Internet, that causes even more problems....... :(
Completely agree :y
-
Zulu77, I'm just wondering what particular mindset you think I have, regarding my use of the word 'alleged' in relation to a prophet called mohammed and his teachings.
I use the word alleged for a number of reasons.
1. I am not a muslim.
2. I do not believe in Islam (or any religion - I believe religion is there for power, control, money and subjugation, but that's another issue).
3. 'Alleged', is a word used when discussing something unproven. How can we not use the word 'alleged' when talking about things as fancy as thus?
Even if you ask a muslim about the events when their prophet mohammed was allegedly spoken to by god, or a christian about their alleged events, or any other religion, we would be wrong in not using the word alleged, as when pressed they will all tell you that they have faith, not proof, or evidence to back it up, and these are believers! You could argue that they have their alleged religious books, which can be used as proof or evidence. I tend to think these are tall stories, no doubt I'll be told off for saying that, we've all got our own opinions!
Even alleged religious books, are only a collection of fact and fiction (decide the ratio for yourself), cobbled together and bastardised over the years, with nothing to back them up.
If you think I have the mindset of a free thinker, who makes informed decisions, who makes his own mind up, not unduely influenced by others, or far fetched fanciful stories designed to subjugate and control us, least of all from the most self serving of the Abrahamic religions, then you're right!
-
religion should be banned, faith has nothing to do with religion, its backdoor politics.
-
Zulu77, I'm just wondering what particular mindset you think I have, regarding my use of the word 'alleged' in relation to a prophet called mohammed and his teachings.
I use the word alleged for a number of reasons.
1. I am not a muslim.
2. I do not believe in Islam (or any religion - I believe religion is there for power, control, money and subjugation, but that's another issue).
3. 'Alleged', is a word used when discussing something unproven. How can we not use the word 'alleged' when talking about things as fancy as thus?
Even if you ask a muslim about the events when their prophet mohammed was allegedly spoken to by god, or a christian about their alleged events, or any other religion, we would be wrong in not using the word alleged, as when pressed they will all tell you that they have faith, not proof, or evidence to back it up, and these are believers! You could argue that they have their alleged religious books, which can be used as proof or evidence. I tend to think these are tall stories, no doubt I'll be told off for saying that, we've all got our own opinions!
Even alleged religious books, are only a collection of fact and fiction (decide the ratio for yourself), cobbled together and bastardised over the years, with nothing to back them up.
If you think I have the mindset of a free thinker, who makes informed decisions, who makes his own mind up, not unduely influenced by others, or far fetched fanciful stories designed to subjugate and control us, least of all from the most self serving of the Abrahamic religions, then you're right!
Thank you for taking the time to consider this response and explaining your line of thought Geoff.
I can now see that you seem to hold a particular opinion on the basic tenets of mainstream 'religion' that wasn't very clear from your initial piece.
Now that you've explained the thinking in your choice of the word 'alleged' I can begin to appreciate your position.
Your initial post now seems to be less of an outright diatribe about the unsavoury (or otherwise) inclinations of the followers of a particular religious discipline (Islam) and more about your concerns of how fervency in, and adherence to, a belief can encourage people to think and behave in a particular way.
You might again be surprised to learn that I agree with more of your opinion than perhaps you would immediately expect.
-
religion should be banned, faith has nothing to do with religion, its backdoor politics.
Totally agreed, causes more problems and wars than anything else.
There are certain Islamic factions (I repeat......factions, before I get a torrent of abuse) in the Middle East that brainwash their kids from birth to hate the Western world............they eventually turn into those pillars of society called terrorist! >:(
-
at least he only threatened to burn a book,they do more than that in pakistan
http://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/headlinenewsd.php?hnewsid=1402
-
very true bob! Theres a young guy at work who has an Essex accent and looks obviously of Indian/Pakistani descent. He was telling me that when he went to watch England play in one of the friendlies before the world cup he was getting a load of grief from other groups of Pakistanis because they thought he was a "bro" and then found out he was going to support England (as he says, thats because he was born in England 3rd generation so he is English). But these other lads were just like him he reckons in that they were probably UK born and 3rd generationtoo. Its not like hes not proud of his "ethnic" roots but he considers himself English. Like he says, that sort of attitude really p*sses him off as theres no need for it. OK, I can see that partly its that "gang" culture thats at play here but surely its also down to cultural indoctrination. And this form of racism clearly goes both ways, it isnt just the old "no dogs/no Irish/no blacks" anymore as our society becomes more "multicultural" :(
-
religion should be banned, faith has nothing to do with religion, its backdoor politics.
Totally agreed, causes more problems and wars than anything else.
There are certain Islamic factions (I repeat......factions, before I get a torrent of abuse) in the Middle East that brainwash their kids from birth to hate the Western world............they eventually turn into those pillars of society called terrorist! >:(
yes..yes.. yess..
-
Zulu77, I'm just wondering what particular mindset you think I have, regarding my use of the word 'alleged' in relation to a prophet called mohammed and his teachings.
I use the word alleged for a number of reasons.
1. I am not a muslim.
2. I do not believe in Islam (or any religion - I believe religion is there for power, control, money and subjugation, but that's another issue).
3. 'Alleged', is a word used when discussing something unproven. How can we not use the word 'alleged' when talking about things as fancy as thus?
Even if you ask a muslim about the events when their prophet mohammed was allegedly spoken to by god, or a christian about their alleged events, or any other religion, we would be wrong in not using the word alleged, as when pressed they will all tell you that they have faith, not proof, or evidence to back it up, and these are believers! You could argue that they have their alleged religious books, which can be used as proof or evidence. I tend to think these are tall stories, no doubt I'll be told off for saying that, we've all got our own opinions!
Even alleged religious books, are only a collection of fact and fiction (decide the ratio for yourself), cobbled together and bastardised over the years, with nothing to back them up.
If you think I have the mindset of a free thinker, who makes informed decisions, who makes his own mind up, not unduely influenced by others, or far fetched fanciful stories designed to subjugate and control us, least of all from the most self serving of the Abrahamic religions, then you're right!
Thank you for taking the time to consider this response and explaining your line of thought Geoff.
I can now see that you seem to hold a particular opinion on the basic tenets of mainstream 'religion' that wasn't very clear from your initial piece.
Now that you've explained the thinking in your choice of the word 'alleged' I can begin to appreciate your position.
Your initial post now seems to be less of an outright diatribe about the unsavoury (or otherwise) inclinations of the followers of a particular religious discipline (Islam) and more about your concerns of how fervency in, and adherence to, a belief can encourage people to think and behave in a particular way.
You might again be surprised to learn that I agree with more of your opinion than perhaps you would immediately expect.
My initial post, by my own admission is a diatribe, if not an outright diatribe. If by diatribe you mean 'a bitter criticism or attack, denunciation'.
Of course I'm not tarring them all with the same brush, but as I stated earlier, where are the moderates to say 'this is not us and what we believe in'?
Your assumption that it was a diatribe (irrelevant that it actually was), is part of the problem in Britain, where silly people think we can all get along harmoniously, with no disagreements. (I'm not calling you silly, just speaking in general). Not that I would want to cause tension or disagreements for their own sake, but I think alot of people need to toughen up and understand you can't agree or get on with everyone, all of the time.
Certain opinions people hold about certain subjects can be deemed as offensive, so I think it would be unwise to offer these opinions as it would create conflict, but if asked their opinions I certainly don't think they should soften their approach, sanitize their views or hide in the shadows to say what they think. Modern day Britain is gradually losing its freedom of speech and expression, in fact I believe all liberties are under threat due to the ruling Liberal Elite's submission to Islam, which is wrong.
I'm all for allowing people to believe what they want to believe, I'd be contradicting myself to say otherwise. However, for someone like me who does not believe in any sort of religion, creation, or intelligent design, to respect any belief in religion, creation, or intelligent design, would be completely wrong.
I think it is more about respecting anothers right to believe what they want, not what they actually believe.
If you agree with more of my OP than you say I would immediately expect, then they say great minds think alike! ;)
-
what do you make of this then? is he now the voice of the islamic nation
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY&feature=related[/media]
-
what do you make of this then? is he now the voice of the islamic nation
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY&feature=related[/media]
Never liked him from day one! I believe he wears black lipstick for a start to help disguise the fact he has white genes, English ones at that! What a Cross that poor man has to bear ::)
OOh! :o just remembered, he's a Muslim, scrub the bit about Crosses :-[ OOh OOh!! just remembered he's American (well, Hawaiian) so best not mention 'English' :P
-
My initial post, by my own admission is a diatribe, if not an outright diatribe. If by diatribe you mean 'a bitter criticism or attack, denunciation'.
Of course I'm not tarring them all with the same brush, but as I stated earlier, where are the moderates to say 'this is not us and what we believe in'?
Your assumption that it was a diatribe (irrelevant that it actually was), is part of the problem in Britain, where silly people think we can all get along harmoniously, with no disagreements. (I'm not calling you silly, just speaking in general). Not that I would want to cause tension or disagreements for their own sake, but I think alot of people need to toughen up and understand you can't agree or get on with everyone, all of the time.
Certain opinions people hold about certain subjects can be deemed as offensive, so I think it would be unwise to offer these opinions as it would create conflict, but if asked their opinions I certainly don't think they should soften their approach, sanitize their views or hide in the shadows to say what they think. Modern day Britain is gradually losing its freedom of speech and expression, in fact I believe all liberties are under threat due to the ruling Liberal Elite's submission to Islam, which is wrong.
I'm all for allowing people to believe what they want to believe, I'd be contradicting myself to say otherwise. However, for someone like me who does not believe in any sort of religion, creation, or intelligent design, to respect any belief in religion, creation, or intelligent design, would be completely wrong.
I think it is more about respecting anothers right to believe what they want, not what they actually believe.
If you agree with more of my OP than you say I would immediately expect, then they say great minds think alike! ;)
Thank you Geoff.
-
what do you make of this then? is he now the voice of the islamic nation
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCAffMSWSzY&feature=related[/media]
thats a real comedy ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
fact : he is choosen to be the one ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
seriously he is choosen (not selected) for a special purpose.. to stop the rising anger of muslim nations.. to show that america respect them and also respect the black man..
but he is from harvard and belong to the white rich group.. and obviously has nothing to do with islam..
juts a political in front of the scene figure saying something related/starting with kouran and trying to play the role ;D ;D
and like previous presidents has nothing to do with the management of country.. just signs the papers ;D
-
Muslim or no muslim, he's probably even more dangerous than Dubya ever was. I think he is weakening America by bolstering the terrorist and extremist element of Islam.
He seeks to appease them by self subjugation, but not just of himself, of the entire U.S.A. Anyway, he is a socialist so will lose the next election on that alone, never mind the fact he's upset the electorate with this insulting disgrace.
-
Muslim or no muslim, he's probably even more dangerous than Dubya ever was. I think he is weakening America by bolstering the terrorist and extremist element of Islam.
He seeks to appease them by self subjugation, but not just of himself, of the entire U.S.A. Anyway, he is a socialist so will lose the next election on that alone, never mind the fact he's upset the electorate with this insulting disgrace.
imo that statement is a bit tall for him.. I'm not sure he is aware of socialism or other things.. ;D
-
I think he was elected for a bet.
-
Bring Dubya back!