Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Is Judeo-christian Violence The Same Thing As Islamic Violence?


nivek

Recommended Posts

So then let's apply this to the bill of rights. These rights are obviously not god-given. It is all but impossible to make the argument that Locke did, that they are natural. And yet, they serve a valid purpose. I personally happen to value them highly. I think they are worth defending. They are in fact quite pragmatic.

 

Does this then make my support of these rights a blind, religious devotion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Grandpa Harley

    21

  • Vigile

    18

  • Amanda

    10

  • Thurisaz

    8

So then let's apply this to the bill of rights. These rights are obviously not god-given. It is all but impossible to make the argument that Locke did, that they are natural. And yet, they serve a valid purpose. I personally happen to value them highly. I think they are worth defending. They are in fact quite pragmatic.

 

Does this then make my support of these rights a blind, religious devotion?

since I don't know you personally, I have no idea. However, I did see your devotions elsewhere, and I speak as I find. Just because it's no based on a god, doesn't make it any less religious fervour... only semantics makes it thus... but the semantic argument is the last recourse of the zealot...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vigile Del Fuoco 1, perhaps I was reading your posts in the wrong light. You seem to care about your country much more than I had thought. My apologies if I offended you. As, I've said... I've always respected you... even if we have a difference of opinions. It's all opinions... even history books have their own slant. I suppose we're all the five blind men and the elephant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that's the first time I've agreed with Amanda... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because it's no based on a god, doesn't make it any less religious fervour... only semantics makes it thus... but the semantic argument is the last recourse of the zealot...

 

It occurs to me that you have set the bar so high that anyone who approaches one's rights with anything above the level of ambivalence is approaching levels of religious fervor.

 

But since it was you that was going overboard with emotional reasoning in the debate over gun laws, I'll just take your opinions on this matter with a grain of salt as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose we're all the five blind men and the elephant.

 

I can live with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because it's no based on a god, doesn't make it any less religious fervour... only semantics makes it thus... but the semantic argument is the last recourse of the zealot...

 

It occurs to me that you have set the bar so high that anyone who approaches one's rights with anything above the level of ambivalence is approaching levels of religious fervor.

 

But since it was you that was going overboard with emotional reasoning in the debate over gun laws, I'll just take your opinions on this matter with a grain of salt as well.

No, I was mocking you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I was mocking you.

 

:shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I was mocking you.

 

:shrug:

:wicked:

 

Well it didn't take much to get the rabid responses I expected elsewhere... Very much religious fervor... but of course it's perfectly reasonable since it's some mythic 'right' or 'freedom' rather than a reasoned argument... :lmao:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those of you advocating pacifism in the face of Muslim Terrorism, I’d like to remind you that that is exactly what the USA was practicing on the morning of 9-11. We weren’t dropping bombs on anyone at that time. Muhammad Atta and his buddies hated us because of 2 reasons..

1) The USA is the most powerful and prosperous country on the face of the planet.

2) Their imaginary friend (thru His church leaders) told them to hate us.

 

People around the world will hate us no matter what we do so long as we are strong, rich, and free.

 

 

I know this goes against Karl rove and his spin machine,however truth be told, people don't hate us for our freedom. This is propaganda and arrogance in it's highest form. People hate us because we have become the new Rome not minding our own business, having military police around the globe in every corner of the planet. Dictating policies to countries who don't have the power or the money to stand up to us. Why not look into our foreign policies before 9/11 and how we railroaded our desires no matter the cost. This war has zero to do with 'freedom'. Bush and his crony's are the most anti-free people to ever hold office in this country. I'll go a step further and say that today the government as a whole believes the entire earth is here to serve their purpose, plans and pockets. They are an embarrassment to both liberty and independence, they don't respect it, value it or promote it, not even in their own country.

 

Vigile, you are obviously one of those people who have bought into the Bush-hater’s propaganda (Propaganda does work both ways, ya know.). Iraq was never blamed for 9-11 until AFTER March 2003 and that link was never uttered by Bush. The claim has only been made by Bush-haters who only claim Bush said it. (I could be wrong here, but I doubt anyone can find a news article dated BEFORE the invasion that quotes Bush saying that Iraq was responsible for 9-11).

 

You can doubt it, but doesn't make it fact...

 

I don't know if you're deliberately being obtuse or not. It is indeed a fact and the entire original reason we went to war with Iraq was due to saddams supposed strong links to Al Qaeda which in turn is linked to 9/11. They were 'connecting the dots' remember? If you recall, they said Iraq was a hub for terrorist and that they'd rather fight them there then here. Of course for some mysterious reason type into a search engine saddam/ Iraq/ 911 and ya don't get much other then conspiracies.. In order to find anything relevant you have to search for other words. But I found them non-the-less. :)

 

 

Sources:

 

A Saddam connection? Salon

 

The specter of Saddam's involvement in the series of hijackings and subsequent attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was raised officially this week by administration sources who told reporters at CBS News and the Boston Globe that one of the known hijackers, Mohammad Atta, may have met with Iraqi intelligence officials during his travels to Europe this past summer. Those sources were quick to say the connection was not a "smoking gun," and Iraqi officials immediately denied their government's involvement.

 

This was not, however, the first indication of Iraqi complicity. A number of intelligence experts have questioned whether bin Laden's organization possessed the intelligence capacity required to pull off the Sept. 11 attacks. They say that even though bin Laden may well have provided the personnel, the most likely suspect behind the logistics of the disaster is Saddam Hussein's intelligence operation.

 

 

In an attempt to show that they had proof they used Clintons own words to support this case at the time.

Example: The Clinton View of Iraq-al Qaeda Ties (The weekly standard)

 

 

The back peddle: Rumsfeld questions Saddam-Bin Laden link (BBC)

 

 

P.S. As you can tell, I’m new.

 

Yes welcome to Ex-C's heated Political debate! :HaHa:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, you aren't really doing a great job making a lucid point, but you are doing an excellent job at being a troll.

 

You're not here to make friends are you Gramps?

 

Too bad. I had some hope for you after the Muslim thread you started. I thought you were making some really good points. I know I learned something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, 'Troll'... board speak version of Christians shouting 'plank', when you disagree or even challenge their sentimental rot... I doubt I'll lose sleep over your disappointment or otherwise. I probably should stick to religion, where my views (or rather lack of them) are more palatable... although I maintain the difference between an opinion and a belief is that if you challenge an opinion, you get a discussion, you challenge a belief you get an angry mob...

 

BTW Japedo... one of the finest posts I've seen in a while... you'll either get a new asshole ripped or ignored...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW Japedo... one of the finest posts I've seen in a while...

 

To bad I can't say the same for you. :Wendywhatever:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Gramps, feel free to disagree with me. I'll be happy to discuss your views. You might actually find that I stand in agreement with you on most issues.

 

I pulled the troll card because of several statements you have made recently. First you admitted intentially mocking me. Yesterday you told members of the board who disagreed with your views, including Japedo, that it was your hope that they had not bred (and actually, I can't think of a finer role model for the next generation than she), and then you made this statement:

 

Well it didn't take much to get the rabid responses I expected elsewhere...

 

Deliberate baiting is a primary definition of trollish behavior. It actually appears as if you were baiting me due to the fact that I was the one who dared disagree with you yesterday in the gun debate.

 

Anyway, whatever. I'm not angry. Sorry if I came across that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And as far as passion, the day that I stop being passionate about some issues is the day that life will lose all spice and flavor. I've admittedly grown too jaded with too many things over the years. The list of things I'm passionate about has shrunk considerably and you know what? I find that this actually makes life a little more bland than it used to be. I think I'll hold on to a few passions even if I'm accused of religious fervor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW Japedo... one of the finest posts I've seen in a while...

 

To bad I can't say the same for you. :Wendywhatever:

If I wanted approval, I'll get a dog... thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Gramps, feel free to disagree with me. I'll be happy to discuss your views. You might actually find that I stand in agreement with you on most issues.

 

I pulled the troll card because of several statements you have made recently. First you admitted intentially mocking me. Yesterday you told members of the board who disagreed with your views, including Japedo, that it was your hope that they had not bred (and actually, I can't think of a finer role model for the next generation than she), and then you made this statement:

 

Well it didn't take much to get the rabid responses I expected elsewhere...

 

Deliberate baiting is a primary definition of trollish behavior. It actually appears as if you were baiting me due to the fact that I was the one who dared disagree with you yesterday in the gun debate.

 

Anyway, whatever. I'm not angry. Sorry if I came across that way.

After anger people often mull... TBH, as soon as people come out with formulaic responses, then I get my suspicion piqued. Everything I saw yesterday was formula... if it weren't buttons wouldn't be tweaked. I've seen people here state Chrisitans shouldn't be allowed children... well, the lack of imagination I saw was of the same magnitude...

 

I don't really give a rat's ass about gun control or otherwise, I do care when people don't (appear) to think... I refer to it as my religious fervour.... In the end, we're all we've got and as soon as people just 'buy' the idea, any idea, without thinking, they're being as dumb as someone who straps C4 to their chest and walks into a restaurant, because they've been told they'll get shagged senseless by virgins in the after life. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It occurs to me that you have confused my arguments with others who were arguing 2nd Ammendment issues yesterday Gramps. I would love it if you could provide just one example of a formulaic response from any of my posts.

 

I saw plenty of them and I agree with you, there were a lot of formulaic responses being tossed around on both sides. Since I pretty much stayed in the middle of the argument though I'm pretty sure you have me confused with some of the other arguments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It occurs to me that you have confused my arguments with others who were arguing 2nd Ammendment issues yesterday Gramps. I would love it if you could provide just one example of a formulaic response from any of my posts.

 

I saw plenty of them and I agree with you, there were a lot of formulaic responses being tossed around on both sides. Since I pretty much stayed in the middle of the argument though I'm pretty sure you have me confused with some of the other arguments.

Oh, quite probably... I'm a bugger for forgetting names. If that's the case unreserved apologies...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW Japedo... one of the finest posts I've seen in a while...

 

To bad I can't say the same for you. :Wendywhatever:

If I wanted approval, I'll get a dog... thanks

 

 

Approval or not, my comment was out of line and I apologize for it. I am perhaps still a little hot headed from your comments on two other threads and the untrue and outrageous labels and statements you have applied to many members here. Perhaps how you think it isn't how it's coming across, I dunno. Maybe the things you said you ment.. In anycase it doesn't matter. I'm sorry for the above comment.

 

 

Moving on I hope!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, no problem. I'm almost impossible to offend, since the person usually has a point about one of my manifest short comings. I probably over cooked the devil's advocate thing. I don't think Ex-Cs are used to it... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, no problem. I'm almost impossible to offend, since the person usually has a point about one of my manifest short comings. I probably over cooked the devil's advocate thing. I don't think Ex-Cs are used to it... ;)

 

 

Well, that's not entirely true. Playing the devils advocate is a good thing and helps one wraps his/her mind around things they might not have thought about previously. It's a good position to take in debates. However, when things are brought to a personal level, things are taken personally. I took the personal statements you applied to many here to heart, and reacted as such. I'm human what can I say... :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that has been debated about me... :D I simply applied some of the comments I've seen about fundies here... I don't singled you out for special treatment...

 

However... pointless raking over one of my failed experiments...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.