Nor did I. It just tells me that there is but one reason that acts of violence by "radicals" don't offend "normal" Muslims, or that those acts are never decried by them. It's because all Muslims believe in those same acts, and that the views held by one are the same views held by all. They're just too cowardly to admit it openly.May just be me, but I didn't see anything remarkable there. I already knew that they really wanted to sit separately and that all of them believed in capital punishment in the cases where the Koran prescribes it. Other than that, I saw nothing new at all...
Not down, but these are the people that are infiltrating into our country. You're a proponent of gay rights, correct? Well, the more of a foothold they gain, the more they'll push for their customs & laws to be implemented. They use the Koran to guide their daily lives. You and others state there is separation of church and state. However, if we allow them to govern themselves by Sharia law, have we separated church and state if government endorses them to "rule" by Sharia?i appreciate the daily reminders of why i should look down on different groups of people
Clear me up here. I went back and listened again. I never heard anything about approving of acts of violence by other Muslims at all. The only reference to "acts" I heard was the reference to approving of the death penalty for the acts set out in the Koran. Again, a large number of Muslims really do believe in Shari'a law, repugnant as it may be to us. I thought everyone knew that orthodox Jews also enforce separate seating by gender in worship. Hell, Christians used to do the same. It appeared to me that this was a cheer-leading session made especially for filming. Who was the Anglo-looking guy on the far right, front row, as looking at the congregation? I noticed he never raised his hand a single time...Nor did I. It just tells me that there is but one reason that acts of violence by "radicals" don't offend "normal" Muslims, or that those acts are never decried by them. It's because all Muslims believe in those same acts, and that the views held by one are the same views held by all. They're just too cowardly to admit it openly.
res ipsa loquiturNot down, but these are the people that are infiltrating into our country. You're a proponent of gay rights, correct? Well, the more of a foothold they gain, the more they'll push for their customs & laws to be implemented. They use the Koran to guide their daily lives. You and others state there is separation of church and state. However, if we allow them to govern themselves by Sharia law, have we separated church and state if government endorses them to "rule" by Sharia?
Among the real worries I have, I think I'll assign this one to about .5, on a scale of 100...Not down, but these are the people that are infiltrating into our country. You're a proponent of gay rights, correct? Well, the more of a foothold they gain, the more they'll push for their customs & laws to be implemented. They use the Koran to guide their daily lives. You and others state there is separation of church and state. However, if we allow them to govern themselves by Sharia law, have we separated church and state if government endorses them to "rule" by Sharia?
If I walk into a forest, I don't have to mentally separate one tree type from another to know where I am..Clear me up here. I went back and listened again. I never heard anything about approving of acts of violence by other Muslims at all. The only reference to "acts" I heard was the reference to approving of the death penalty for the acts set out in the Koran. Again, a large number of Muslims really do believe in Shari'a law, repugnant as it may be to us. I thought everyone knew that orthodox Jews also enforce separate seating by gender in worship. Hell, Christians used to do the same. It appeared to me that this was a cheer-leading session made especially for filming. Who was the Anglo-looking guy on the far right, front row, as looking at the congregation? I noticed he never raised his hand a single time...
Hmm... So that's what you expect, then? How many bigots have you denounced publicly lately? Just curious...If I walk into a forest, I don't have to mentally separate one tree type from another to know where I am..
Neither must I mentally separate one Muslim from another to know that what one thinks, so does the other. If that were not the case, our neighborhood mosques would be all over the media yelling at the top of their lungs "That's not us! We don't believe in doing that and we don't support those who do!". But what do we hear?
Crickets..
None, but I've recently told someone who's been a friend for many years that I don't care to associate with or be a friend to a man who mercilessly beats his wife. Iow, I call them as I see them, and I've gotten to that point in my life that I care very little what others think..Hmm... So that's what you expect, then? How many bigots have you denounced publicly lately? Just curious...
I appreciate that entirely. I'm just pointing up the illogic in saying that all Muslims must approve of the radicals because they're not more vocal in denouncing them, while that rule doesn't seem to apply to other religions. It's been puzzling to me since I first saw it advanced...None, but I've recently told someone who's been a friend for many years that I don't care to associate with or be a friend to a man who mercilessly beats his wife. Iow, I call them as I see them, and I've gotten to that point in my life that I care very little what others think..
When was the last time someone did this sort of thing in the name of another religion? Not a rhetorical questions, I literally cannot recall the last time a Christian, Jew, Buddhist, etc. committed these sorts of atrocities in the name of their religion.'m just pointing up the illogic in saying that all Muslims must approve of the radicals because they're not more vocal in denouncing them, while that rule doesn't seem to apply to other religions. It's been puzzling to me since I first saw it advanced...
I think that's a very valid and deep question. Disregarding the Jews, who've had their atrocities, to be sure, but smaller because of their strict entrance standards and small numbers, there's no doubt that Christians have caused the death of hundreds of thousands of deaths, in the name of Christ, a large percentage of whom were Muslim. I guess, with the Muslim radicals, it's "why now?" Particularly after centuries of being passive. I guess if I had to pick a beginning, I'd say the rise of Wahabism...When was the last time someone did this sort of thing in the name of another religion? Not a rhetorical questions, I literally cannot recall the last time a Christian, Jew, Buddhist, etc. committed these sorts of atrocities in the name of their religion.
Heck, there's more response from Christians in the US over Westboro Baptist, and they've never (physically) hurt anyone, much less committed murder...
Whatever.Among the real worries I have, I think I'll assign this one to about .5, on a scale of 100...
Yet you lap it up at every opportunity.i appreciate the daily reminders of why i should look down on different groups of people
I took pluckngrit's statement to mean that the muslims who want to slice off 92's head want to slice off 92's head, which is, be definition, true. How many muslims are in that category is the question at hand.By these people, you mean every single person who identifies with the muslim faith correct? In that currently there are 1.6 billion people who would love nothing more than to kill 92 if they came across him. Just making sure I have it right.
92's ex wife may have wanted to slice off his head.I took pluckngrit's statement to mean that the muslims who want to slice off 92's head want to slice off 92's head, which is, be definition, true. How many muslims are in that category is the question at hand.
There may be some non-muslims who want to slice off 92's head (French Jacobins, perhaps?), but they have not made themselves known as of yet.