knapplc wrote:Why should Islam as a body apologize for 9/11? I don't seem to recall Christianity apologizing for the Murrah bombing in Oklahoma City. Since when does the overall body need to apologize for the actions of a few, especially those few whose behavior is so diametrically opposed to their belief? Think about what you're saying here, because rationally it makes no sense. Here, let me help you:
If I burn down my neighbor's house and say, "I did this in the name of m16a," are you going to feel responsible? Are you going to apologize to him for it? Of course not. You don't advocate such acts, you don't believe in such things, and anyone who thought rationally about the situation would realize I wasn't doing it in your name, they'd realize I'm some crackpot with my own agenda hiding behind your name.
If you truly have Muslim friends, please talk to them about jihad again, because your understanding of it is lacking. Jihad is a struggle, pure and simple. It is most often ascribed to an internal struggle of faith, or a struggle against sin, but it can be used to describe other things, including familial strife, strife between religious sects, and a struggle against those who oppose Islam. It encompasses many things, but it is not inherently violent. Again, radicals can pervert the meaning of jihad, but that doesn't mean their interpretation is accurate.
Really, really, really go educate yourself on Islam. It is as violent as Christianity, as peaceful as Christianity.
Cogent points, knapp, and I really understand where you are coming from. Just a few things to add. I agree that I would not feel responsibility for your actions, however, I might feel the need to give an apology on your behalf. Perception is a huge part of how people navigate this world, and pain kills most rationality in people. As a messianic Jew, when I witness to tradition Jews, I encounter questions about the Holocaust a lot, particularly older Jewish folks who still have the notion that it was the Christians responsible. While they were not responsible, some very very perverted Nazis decided it would be worthwhile to destroy in his name, and though I personally know they were not Christian, I still apologize, because it is a perception they have about Christians. Not a totally straight analogy, but close enough.
Now, in regards to the violence thing, I am certainly not denying Christianity has don horrible things in its lifetime, it most certainly has, but by and large, it has been reforming on that point (the rest of it, I won't start on doctrinal issues beginning to plague the Christian world), but Islam has not. If you know your history, you know Mohammad was a violent person, as were his followers, and the main point of Jihad at its start was the war on the non believer. THIS is the most often manner it is used in, whether we like it or not. I am fully aware of the newer, now more emphasized version of Jihad, the war on temptation, personal sin etc. I do think it is a great thing that many of the more modern Muslims accept this, but the fact is, because Islam started out a "radical" religion, the core of it STILL remains radical. While not as many act as believe, it is still a dangerous religion to have on this planet. I would have no trouble with Islam had it been reversed, because some violent change is to be expected with such a huge religion. While it is trying to go forward, it isn't going to be able to escape its roots. I will certainly speak with my Muslim acquaintances on this issue to shed some light on it.
Props to Deluxe for the sig There is nothing more frightening than ignorance in action. - Goethe
knapplc wrote:The point is that this mosque will be no closer to Ground Zero than any of these churches, and you never raised a fuss about this. Having never raised a fuss, you're tacitly in approval of their presence, despite the fact that David Koresh reads (oops, read) the exact same book they teach about. So, it's OK for the church of David Koresh to be within two blocks of the WTC, but not for the mosque of Osama bin Laden. Tell me, how do you determine which radical fundamentalist's faith is OK?
These churches didn't fly planes into a building. There was no reason to fuss. And David Koresh didn't attend any of those churches. There is no Church of David Koresh near ground zero. He attended a 7th day adventist and was kicked out for claiming that God wanted him to marry the pastors daughter. He then joined a small sect of other disfellowshipped members and started claiming the gift of Prophecy and the Bible warns us of FALSE prophets. If David was reading that same book he would know this: Deu 18:20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. Since the Prophet preaches repentance and obedience to God's law which he wasn't doing (having sex with Lois), he must be considered a false prophet thus not a man of God.
I ask that because you say you would "piss" on a mosque, apparently because people who identify themselves as Muslim destroyed those buildings and killed those people. Would you also "piss" on a church? Timothy McVeigh, a Christian, destroyed the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City. There aren't two standards here. You either lay blame on Christians for McVeigh's actions the same as you blame Muslims for bin Laden's, or you use your head to realize that neither McVeigh nor bin Laden represent either faith.
No I wouldn't piss on a church. Just a Mosque. Timothy Mcveigh said in an interview that he lost touch with Catholacism. I believe him after those horrific acts. No association in my book.
You continually look at this from a completely one-sided point of view. You turn a blind eye to the crimes committed by Christian radicals, yet denounce all of Islam for the actions of their radicals. That kind of unthinking fundamentalism is exactly what the Osama bin Ladens and the Timoth McVeighs of the world are looking for. You may think you're giving me a dig by saying "I think Osama would like you," but the sad truth is, your mind set is nearly identical to his - you just root for a different team.
Christians and Muslims have had their battles but with the rash of terrorist attacks from groups like Osama's, suicide bombings, etc Islam took the lead. I covered Mcveigh and Koresh above. Mcveigh wasn't a Christian radical and Koresh wasn't living the Christian life the Bible would have expected out of him.
Yes, you did say that Islam toppled those buildings. I even used your phrases when I responded so you would see the issue. Here's what you said,"Not to mention the relgion that mosque represents [Islam] happens to be the same religion [Islam] that toppled the towers." (emphasis mine) Again, you have trouble separating the actions of a fringe from the intent of the main. Whether that's by inability or intent doesn't matter, because it's led you to the point where you're, apparently, willing to take overt action "I would likely piss on [the mosque]..." and you would, by your own words, need to restrain yourself from something even worse.
That was the beer talking. Here is what I meant. Bin Laden was a Muslim who believed in Islam. So a man who believed in the islamic religion toppled the towers. Other Islamic people like these http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMOZvbYJMvU loved it that the towers got toppled. If they lived here in the US they would go to the mosque you want. Thats why it would bug me seeing one that close to ground zero. You are essentually putting a dagger in a lot of American hearts.
This form of intolerance disgusts me. It is the polar opposite of what this country stands for. It is the very reason I sit at my drudge's job whose bureaucratic BS I hate simply so I can, on the rare occasion, put the kibosh on the kind of thinking you're displaying here.
What intolerence? I'd be tolerant to them putting one on the other side of the city. That isn't the issue. The issue for me is putting one close to ground zero.
America is founded on, among other things, the principle of freedom of religion. We believe that no man should be persecuted for his belief in his god, or belief in no god. We believe that every man should be able to worship a god or not worship a god in equal peace. The very first words of the very first Amendment to the U.S. Constitution puts paid to your whole argument: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Call me crazy, but I'm going to throw my hat in with the Constitution on this debate.
The real question is, why wouldn't you?
They have the fredom of religion. You don't necessarily need a mosque to have the freedom of religion. I'm not taking that away by not wanting them to build a mosque by ground zero and instead somewhere else. I feel they should respect us enough by not building one there. They know damn well ground zero is a very emotional place for many Americans (out of respect I wont include you as one of those Americans since you seem to have forgotten already).
Errr..... yeah it does. I take it you've never read the Quran, or even attempted to understand it? The Quran speaks of Dajjal (liars) - false prophets whose intent is to lead the people of Islam astray. They are equivalent to the Anti-Christ in Christian theology, and a simple google search could have told you that.
Nope. Actions speak louder than words. Bin Laden is taking action on what he sees as the infidels just like the Quran tells him to do. How do you know that his beliefs are not really what the Quran wants out of a true islamic person?
That's what's most sad about your stance here - freedom from the kind of bigotry you're displaying is just a few keywords away, yet you seem unwilling to even try. You link to pictures of 9/11 and right-wing websites focusing on hysteria and fear-mongering as if these things were directly related to a particular mosque on a particular street. They're not, any more than Trinity Church is directly related to images of the Murrah Building's destruction.
Bigotry where? I am definately impartial to them being peaceful and believing in Allah. I'm not impartial to the blowing up places, or driving planes into the twin towers just like I'm not impartial to Mcveigh blowing up the Fed building. If that is a bigot I'm a proud one.
You "know" I read left side news? What is left side news? For that matter, what news sources do I read? How would you know that? That's nearly as funny as the fact that you quoted a source called "right side news" whose headline - but no source in the "article" - states that Islam has declared war on America. This website is rank propaganda of the most ignorant form, yet you use it to bolster your argument and, apparently, expect to be taken seriously. I do not, any more than if you had quoted The Onion.
You sort of missed the joke. Obviously you voted Obama and I voted the other way. My link said right side news and I'm sure you don't go to right wing sites to get your info. So I said you probably go to leftside news to get your info. I was just trying to side track you by getting you to read nonsense. I didn't think you would bite.
This peaceful muslim gets it: One such individual is Zuhdi Jasser, a physician, US Navy veteran, and founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy.
Jasser reminisced last week about his family’s history of building mosques in the heartland communities where they lived. His parents, Syrian immigrants to the United States, helped create the Fox Valley Islamic Center in Neenah, Wis., in 1980. “This was during the Iranian hostage crisis,’’ he recalled, “and some of the local residents wanted the Zoning Commission to prevent the mosque from going forward.’’ But the commissioners gave their blessing to the project, and the modest mosque — the construction budget was just $80,000 — became part of the neighborhood. Later the family later moved to western Arkansas, where they joined with others to create the Islamic Center of Fort Smith. As recently as March, Jasser came out in support of Muslims in Sheboygan, Wis., whose plans for a new place of worship were meeting with vocal resistance.
But he adamantly opposes the ground zero mosque.
“For us, a mosque was always a place to pray, to be together on holidays — not a way to make an ostentatious architectural statement,’’ Jasser said. “Ground zero shouldn’t be about promoting Islam. It’s the place where war was declared on us as Americans.’’ To use that space for Muslim outreach, he argues, is “the worst form of misjudgment.’’
The rest are just Ad Hominem Fallacies to partner with the multiple Strawman fallacies you already presented. b
Cowboys 4 life
(Past Year: 78)
Joined: 18 Jul 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Somewhere between Silicon Valley and a bunch of Fruits