Nairobi attacks - you'll have seen this, no doubt.

Chiteng said:
Apparently it is YOU who knows nothing about Islam: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
Click to expand...
You base that on the rantings of a clearly Islamophobic hate site instead of facts?

Chiteng said:
And I do NOT add all 'christian' religions together and pretend they are simply one religion.
Click to expand...
You means as you are doing with Islam?

What exactly am I "pretending" here? That they are all based on the same basic precepts found in the New Testament? That none of them condone terrorism, just as no sect based on the Koran does?

Chiteng said:
What difference does that make? Do they suddenly become non-Islamic when they do that? Possibly in your mind, but they dont skate in mine. Maybe the non-violent Muslims
should police themselves
Click to expand...
You mean as the Muslim community in Kenya did after the attacks last year? How they will quite likely respond this time as well?
 
Chiteng said:
My religion does not demand that everyone else convert to it, or die or be enslaved.
Islam does.

There is no real comparison. When you pretend there is, you defend by inference
the actions of the perps.
Click to expand...

From what I know, their's doens't demand those things either. Some sects do interpret their holy book that way - but like I tried to show you, so do some "christian" sects.

I don't really see a difference, but then again I see most religious issues akin to arguing about the qualities of various Smurfs.

And, for what it's worth, I really enjoy your logical leap that since I'm questioning your premise I must be therefore defending an atrocity. That is not at all a rational conclusion, FYI.
 
peter grimes said:
From what I know, their's doens't demand those things either. Some sects do interpret their holy book that way - but like I tried to show you, so do some "christian" sects.

I don't really see a difference, but then again I see most religious issues akin to arguing about the qualities of various Smurfs.

And, for what it's worth, I really enjoy your logical leap that since I'm questioning your premise I must be therefore defending an atrocity. That is not at all a rational conclusion, FYI.
Click to expand...

Possibly if you DID have faith, you would see the difference.

My premise was stated in my original post. It cannot be refuted because it
is empirical:

The perps all belong to the same religion
The perps allowed people of the same religion to leave
The perps then started killing people who were NOT their religion.

There is no way to hide that reality. To me the conclusions are obvious, if you wish to stay alive.
 
I've never had a Muslim try to convert, kill or enslave me.

I've met some stubborn Jehovah's Witnesses (Mormons, conversely, seem to be impeccably gracious), and I've been thumped by a few Protestants.

Not really sure how that fits together.
 
Formaldehyde said:
You base that on the rantings of a clearly Islamophobic hate site instead of facts?

You means as you are doing with Islam?

What exactly am I "pretending" here? That they are all based on the same basic precepts found in the New Testament? That none of them condone terrorism, just as no sect based on the Koran does?


You mean as the Muslim community in Kenya did after the attacks last year? How they will quite likely respond this time as well?
Click to expand...

I am unconcerned about your 'labels' of the site offered. Maybe if you actually read
it, it would answer alot of the questions you are asking.

It backs up its posting(s) with a great deal of sources and evidence.
Maybe that is why you dont like it. Because you cant casually dismiss its conclusions.

Ninety Bodies is a hard argument that whatever is happening, isnt working.
 
Traitorfish said:
I've never had a Muslim try to convert, kill or enslave me.

I've met some stubborn Jehovah's Witnesses (Mormons, conversely, seem to be impeccably gracious), and I've been thumped by a few Protestants.

Not really sure how that fits together.
Click to expand...

What a shame you have not read their various source material.
It isnt a secret.
It is just that sane people simply refuse to believe that the religion is actually serious.
There is no single source, that is one of the problems.
 
Chiteng said:
My religion does not demand that everyone else convert to it, or die or be enslaved.
Islam does.
Click to expand...

Really? Because the Christian chap on the street corner 2 nights ago shouting at me that I was doomed to an eternity of burning in hell for not converting certainly sounded like a demand.
 
Chiteng said:
Possibly if you DID have faith, you would see the difference.

My premise was stated in my original post. It cannot be refuted because it
is empirical:

The perps all belong to the same religion
The perps allowed people of the same religion to leave
The perps then started killing people who were NOT their religion.

There is no way to hide that reality. To me the conclusions are obvious, if you wish to stay alive.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
Right... so if I suspend rational thinking, THEN I'd finally realize your irrefutable conclusion.

You do realize, I hope, that's not how critical thinking works? :dunno:

And you seem to be confused about the meanings of the words 'refute' and 'empirical'. For that matter, you seem to be confused about universal claims versus existence claims, how to distinguish between the two, and the logical fallacies associated with each.

The perps all belong to the same tribe
The perps allowed people of the same tribe to leave
The perps then started killing people who were NOT their tribe.

Do you still choose not to see the problem with your generalization?
 
Owen Glyndwr said:
Really? Because the Christian chap on the street corner 2 nights ago shouting at me that I was doomed to an eternity of burning in hell for not converting certainly sounded like a demand.
Click to expand...

Did he shoot you for refusing to listen to him? That is the difference
 
peter grimes said:
:rolleyes:
Right... so if I suspend rational thinking, THEN I'd finally realize your irrefutable conclusion.

You do realize, I hope, that's not how critical thinking works? :dunno:

And you seem to be confused about the meanings of the words 'refute' and 'empirical'. For that matter, you seem to be confused about universal claims versus existence claims, how to distinguish between the two, and the logical fallacies associated with each.

The perps all belong to the same tribe
The perps allowed people of the same tribe to leave
The perps then started killing people who were NOT their tribe.

Do you still choose not to see the problem with your generalization?
Click to expand...

This is an electronic forum, not high school debate.
I admit I am lazy, so sue me.
Ninety bodies is hard to refute.

I am not willing to parse sub-sets. I offered you a site that prints only facts.
You dismissed it. Obviously then you dont wish to be convinced. You are simply
being polemical. I dont have the interest.
 
Owen Glyndwr said:
Really? Because the Christian chap on the street corner 2 nights ago shouting at me that I was doomed to an eternity of burning in hell for not converting certainly sounded like a demand.
Click to expand...

Explaining the consequences is not the same as forcing one to convert. Now, the RCC back in the day knew how to force conversion, but they've not done that for awhile now.
 
Gucumatz said:
Some of the attackers are being reported to have been American or come from America from near Minnesota. Sort of curious - what I have been reading about this group is they seem to be far less organized than other cells
Click to expand...

peter grimes said:
Back on topic:
Is there a reliable number for how many of these extremists came from the US? I've seen widely varying numbers, from 2 to 12.
Click to expand...

That group has been connected to Minneapolis before. I wonder if some of the men they were looking for three years ago had already left the US and were involved in this attack.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH2oz9xbi4w
 
VRWCAgent said:
Explaining the consequences is not the same as forcing one to convert. Now, the RCC back in the day knew how to force conversion, but they've not done that for awhile now.
Click to expand...

He wasn't "explaining the consequences" to me, he was threatening me.
 
Bamspeedy said:
That group has been connected to Minneapolis before. I wonder if some of the men they were looking for three years ago had already left the US and were involved in this attack.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH2oz9xbi4w
Click to expand...

It's too bad the NSA is tying up sparse resources monitoring G-20 summits, VerizonWireless metadata, DEA informatics requests and such - otherwise they might have the skillz to do the job they were originally mandated to do.

Mission creepers gonna creep.
 
Threatening to convert is him saying he'll behead you if you don't. Telling you that you're gonna burn in hell if you don't isn't threatening. It's explaining the consequences if you choose not to.
 
Just as the consequences of not converting might be explainer as the loss of one's head?

I agree there's a difference though; in one example the person is saying that they will hurt you, in the other the person is saying that something else will hurt you, and they're just trying to warn you about it. So it's a threat in the same way an anti-smoking ad is.
 
peter grimes said:
It's too bad the NSA is tying up sparse resources monitoring G-20 summits, VerizonWireless metadata, DEA informatics requests and such - otherwise they might have the skillz to do the job they were originally mandated to do.

Mission creepers gonna creep.
Click to expand...

I haven't heard if it's been confirmed yet that Americans were involved. But if so, why not attack that big mall right there in Minneapolis......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom