What reason is there to suppress "inconvenient" truth?

Because when Ragic did it, it was funny because it was about "them". You guys are such incredible hypocrites.

And we've been over this before, but we can't discuss it anymore because you would get emotional and kalasle would close the thread.

 

Hmm, reading over the posts, this is what it looked like to me:

Ragic - "Sarcasm about the solution being what the Islamic terrorists are saying is the solution"

BurnPyro - "Sarcasm about the solution being for X group 'I' (BP) is speaking to to commit suicide"

I think that's about right? I didn't think either was very funny, but I also thought they were very different.
Ragic's seemed sarcastic and as though he were rolling his eyes.
Yours seemed sarcastic, but more callous than "eye-rolly".
Maybe I'm just reading it wrong, but that was the general feeling I got.

 

Just a guess here but I think prof meant "annulled homosexuality being prohibited" at least that would fit the context of the discussion. Feel free to correct me or elaborate @profhulk

 

Ragic was talking about policing his own community, implying that other muslims were accountable for not stopping the others who did the dumb stuff. This was elaborated on in further posts about what happens in mosques etc.

Taking this piece of ignorance in mind, I suggested that if we had to police our own groups, the right wingers could start by themselves before they expanded this idiocy and more to others. Further nuggets in my sentences: Trump claiming we should go after the families of terrorists, hence the implication. Right wingers (Hello ted cruz) saying we could just carpetbomb the lot and the extra victims would not matter because the means justify the end. Hence if we wanna be thorough we should start with all right wingers who display signs of crazy.

Did I take it too far? Probably. Was I tired of hearing the same idiocy again on these forums that other right wingers gobble up without a second though, but get outraged when the mirror is turned to them? Also probably.

I don't do well with people who are either willingly ignorant or just biased to a point where their intelligence is dropping to dangerously low levels. Especially if those people constantly claim to be attacked and victimized, while attacking and victimizing others.

 

Actually the correct term would be reasonableness, not intelligence. Intelligence being something that is more a factor of how much you know, reasonableness being the factor of how correctly you use what you know.

(other than that your post helped me understand what was going on, thanks).

 

So I am curious why this applies to Christianity and not other religions.

 

Well, Sokolov already explained most of it.

But I would also add that I was talking about a specific topic (mainly regarding older vs. newer stuff in the Bible). I'd say that it isn't always true for every topic, which goes for every religion.

 

so youre suggesting that others should reform the Muslim religion for them? Since the term 'policing themselves' is too politically incorrect for you. interesting.

 

It seems to me that you often misunderstand what Righties have typed/said, get angry, feel justified in lashing out and then do so with passion.

It is clear to me that you are a very smart chap. High IQ, educated and working to make your mark in RL. But misunderstandings in this forum are holding you back. Certainly some of this is my fault. And I apologize. My style is loud and passionate/abrasive, per my wife. I am still a work in progress.

I did NOT take Ragic's remark to mean that he wanted some Muslims to slaughter lots of other Muslims. @Ragic should clarify his comment. Your remarks though, BP, were pretty dang clear. Apparently you meant it as biting sarcasm or morbid humor. Benefit of the doubt that you don't actually want 10s of millions of people to off themselves.

Which path do you believe will best result in Western Civilization defeating the current wave of terrorism by Muslims?

 

Pretty sure you are being intentionally ignorant but the implication is that they are as much a part of Islam as the kkk is Christianity.

 

where does kkk get its members from. rednecks who have been raised their whole lives to hate black people. where does isis get its members from?

 

Ragic has a point here.

ISIS and similar organizations get their recruits solely from the Muslim population by twisting the Koran and using it to convert impressionable Muslim youth (that don't know much about the Koran's teachings) and/or already angry/upset Muslims. Sadly, your average Muslim doesn't actually know much about the Koran, so it's fairly easy for extremists to use that against them.

KKK and similar organizations get their recruits primarily (not entirely, but I'm uncertain as to where else they come from) from red-necks (ones taught to be racist, not all red-necks are racist) and "hill-billies". They also get some recruits from disconnected Elites that usually come from a long line of wealth and racism. There are "Christians" among them, but they are very few in number, and the ones that are there have next to no real knowledge of the Bible or its teachings.

So, ISIS and similar organizations are primarily radical religious fanatics, while the KKK is primarily radical secular fanatics. At least, that's my understanding of it.

 

This guy seems like a good reference. Recommend listening to the whole thing, this guy has lived a unique life.

 

I put it on my Watch Later list, as I need to go to bed. Look forward to it.

 

This is wrong, ISIS/terrorist organizations do not target religious youth. They target ostracized, impoverished and disenfranchised individuals. Much like members of the kkk feel the world is out to get them and their white privilege is under siege those who join ISIS are not people who love their religious text, they are people who feel the world has abandoned them, in fact a large percentage of those who join ISIS have little to no prior knowledge of Islam, you may remember the story of a few people trying to join ISIS (who were caught) that brought Islam for Dummies and Koran for Dummies to read on their flight over to Syria, this is not uncommon.

 

Terrorists are scum, and I hope they fade into history ASAP.

Comparing success of Muslim terrorists to success of KKK terrorists, during the last few decades, seems like a ginormously YUGE stretch. One is global, the other can rarely be found outside swamps, hills, backwoods or Walmart. Savvy?

 

this is another thing that i've been wondering about-

how many serious terrorist attacks have there been on US soil since 9/11, taking out the boston marathon bombing and arguably including benghazi? i live right outside DC in a fairly heavily populated area with headquarters for a few companies (discovery's probably the largest i know of), and i really haven't heard that much about confirmed terrorist threat, even though i'm living next to a massive target and in a smaller one. there might have been a scare or two about the metro in the last few years, but honestly the greater threat with the metro was the people running it continuing to neglect proper maintenance

i understand that there have been bombings and shootings in other western countries, but when it comes to the US specifically i'm at a loss to explain why people seem so worried about terrorism in the states. am i completely misremembering things, or just misinterpreting or something?

 

from a 2005 New York Times article
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/14/opinion/the-madrassa-myth.html?_r=0

"We examined the educational backgrounds of 75 terrorists behind some of the most significant recent terrorist attacks against Westerners. We found that a majority of them are college-educated, often in technical subjects like engineering. In the four attacks for which the most complete information about the perpetrators' educational levels is available -- the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, the attacks on the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, the 9/11 attacks, and the Bali bombings in 2002 -- 53 percent of the terrorists had either attended college or had received a college degree. As a point of reference, only 52 percent of Americans have been to college. The terrorists in our study thus appear, on average, to be as well educated as many Americans."

so college educated is ostracized, impoverished and disenfranchised? granted its an old article. perhaps global warming has devalued college degrees since then. im sure more than a few KKK members are under the college level. yet even they don't kill themselves for their cause. why? because Christianity says its wrong. religion trumps economic status.