Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.

Page 3 of 11 [ 167 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

01 Mar 2017, 9:17 am

EzraS wrote:

[

As a reader I appreciate these kinds of replies as opposed to the heckling multiple lol emotes variety.

It was not bad but fell on the wrong side.

Have a quick look at this and opine for us please.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSms8nbgTSI

Regards
DL

GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

01 Mar 2017, 9:21 am

feral botanist wrote:

[

Three former secretaries of state, along with ex-CIA officials and Obama administration intelligence officials, claim President Donald Trump's travel ban on people from seven Muslim-majority nations serves "no national security purpose."
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201 ... ravel-ban/

.

They may or may not be correct. That aside.

Do you think it timely to give Islam the message that if they continue to be intolerant, Western countries will ban them or do as some European countries are doing and deporting them and or outlawing Burkas and minarets?

Regards
DL

feral botanist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 881
Location: in the dry land

01 Mar 2017, 10:26 am

GnosticBishop wrote:

feral botanist wrote:

GnosticBishop wrote:

Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.

The Golden Rule and other reciprocity sayings indicate that what we grant ourselves or some others should also be granted to everyone. This would include the right to critique religions and governments.

Islam and it’s Muslim adherents are quite vocal in denigrating other religions and political system, yet say that others who denigrate Islam and Sharia should be penalized in various ways, --- even unto death.

Where I come from, reciprocity is fair play and all players in a game play by the same rules. Islam and Muslims wants to win the God wars by having different restrictive rules for their interlocutors.

Should we respect and tolerate a religion that denies us the rights and play by the same rules that they enjoy?

If yes, please tell me why we should respect such a religion.

Regards
DL

To which Muslim or group of Muslims are you refering?

I could make the claim that trump supporters are racist, and although some are, there are many who would be offended by that generalization.

This represent the logical fallacy of the strawman argument.

You might want to revue the meaning of terms before using them incorrectly.

But the simple answer is that you are judged by who you stand with.

If you stand with those who are considered to have certain character traits, then you will be seen as having them or supporting them.

Regards
DL

Terms? You mean strawman?

Strawman-exaggerating, misrepresenting or fabricating someones arguement, it becomes much easier to seem reasonable.

Like how you chracterized all muslims as intolerant so you could claim to be following the golden rule?

If you are who you stand with, then all catholics are pedophiles, all christains are people who murder abortion doctors (Dougars -pedophile), all mormons are polygamist pedophiles, all muslims are terrorists and all republicans are orange p**** grabbers.

The logic of your argument is suspect.

feral botanist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 881
Location: in the dry land

01 Mar 2017, 10:29 am

GnosticBishop wrote:

feral botanist wrote:

Sorry, what does this have to do with your original thesis?

jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

01 Mar 2017, 10:49 am

So, will a full Muslim ban satisfy you, or should we also round up and expel everyone who professes Islam?

_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

01 Mar 2017, 1:48 pm

feral botanist wrote:

EzraS wrote:

feral botanist wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

Citizenship can not be vetted from those countries, 6 of the 7 are in civil war and Iran is directly involved in 3 of them. I think the reaction to the temporary travel ban to been way overblown. It's not a Muslim ban since it's doesn't ban all or most or even close to most Muslims but rather 7 countries that were identified as problems. Unnamed sources from DHS really doesn't mean anything to me, the head of the FBI James Comey said that we cannot vet these people so a new system must be put in place. Regardless if you disagree with it or not, I think it is unquestionably legal and that the 9th circuit exposed itself as a joke by their ruling.

If immigration was shut down in 1492, there'd probably be a few more Indians around. Always such a weird thing to bring up immigration debates since it kind of exactly proves the point about the dangers of open borders.

FWIW I'm not even against taking in a limited amount of refugees but they would be religious minorities and others that were getting persecuted not the people who support the radical Salafi form of Islam who are doing the persecuting.

It is hard to be the lectured about religious tolerance from Muslim countries since almost none of them especially in the Middle East are tolerant at all.

I am reading this on my phone, so if you break it up into small paragraphs it makes it easier to understand.

Three former secretaries of state, along with ex-CIA officials and Obama administration intelligence officials, claim President Donald Trump's travel ban on people from seven Muslim-majority nations serves "no national security purpose."
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/201 ... ravel-ban/

Please refer to my point about authoritarians and how evidence to the contrary actually strengthens thier beliefs.

So we are discussing intolerance. You claim that at a national level it is intolerance.

You claim that all muslim countries are intolerant? Do I have that correct?

I would counter that the US is coming close to your definition of intolerance.

As a reader I appreciate these kinds of replies as opposed to the heckling multiple lol emotes variety.

If people post thing that are incredibly stupid or divorced from reality or both, then I cant help but laugh. If somebody wants to have a logical rational discussion then I wont. I prefer rational.

I wish you were half as good at this and you think you are. But hey as long as you're having fun and it makes you feel accomplished.

lidsmichelle
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 May 2016
Gender: Female
Posts: 686
Location: South-eastern Washington

01 Mar 2017, 2:12 pm

I love the claims of logical, while linking to unsubstantiated websites and YouTube screeds. Ok lol. O great rational bigot man. Call me when you have actual data to back up your claims about Islam and entire ethnic groups as a whole. I suspect I'll be waiting a long time though lmao.

Yes this is directed at the OP. They claim logic while having no actual accredited resources and while posting arguments that are entirely emotionally worded and based on their personal opinions.

_________________
Herein You Will Find Various And Numerous And Innumerable Hexes, Curses, Words In The Old Tongue To Cleave A’Twain Friend, Foe, Family Alike. If You So Choose. Money Hates Me, God Hates Me, My Wife Hates Me, My Own Hands Hate Me. But Thats All Beside The Point. The Point Is That My Time Here On Earth Runs Short. Im Not Dying But You All Are. Im A Glass Of Wine. Nothing Beats A Glass Of Wine. When The Kids Arent Home And Your A Mother Theres A Glass Of Wine There. A Glass Coffee Table And I’m A Glass Of Wine. Stressful Day When The Kids And you're Husband Then Glass Of Wine. Dark Chocolate Indulge. Petty Indulgences. When you're A Glass Of Wine And Let The Body’s Hit The Floor. When Your Glass Of Wine Is Running Short And You Say Heck What Of It. Why Dont I Have Another. Bartender I Am A Glass Of Wine. Bottoms Up And The Devil Laughs. The Bartender Remembers When It Happened. They All Remember When It Happened And If They Knew That You Dont Remember Then They Would Know That Something Is Awry Here Or So They Would Think. Something Would Be Amiss Or Smells Fishy. So Theyre All Relating There Stories Of Where They Were When That Event Happened And The Eyes Move Clockwise About The Room Where We All Share Our Glass Of Wine And Suddenly The Clock Ticks To You And They Ask The Fatal Question That Destroys Your Reputation, The Question You Could Never Answer, The Dead Giveaway: Where Were You When The Bodies Hit The Floor

feral botanist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 881
Location: in the dry land

01 Mar 2017, 6:00 pm

EzraS wrote:

feral botanist wrote:

EzraS wrote:

feral botanist wrote:

Jacoby wrote:

As a reader I appreciate these kinds of replies as opposed to the heckling multiple lol emotes variety.

If people post thing that are incredibly stupid or divorced from reality or both, then I cant help but laugh. If somebody wants to have a logical rational discussion then I wont. I prefer rational.

I wish you were half as good at this and you think you are. But hey as long as you're having fun and it makes you feel accomplished.

Nice! You hit the trifecta! 3 logical fallacies in one post.
Strawman
Ad hominem
Tu quoque

:lol:

feral botanist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 881
Location: in the dry land

01 Mar 2017, 6:17 pm

GnosticBishop wrote:

Farunel wrote:

I haven't done enough research on Muslims to say anything directed at their religion in particular. But yes. Your original statement is true. If a religion is found to be intolerant of others (Or at least a great number of them), then they deserve no tolerance of them.

We do need to think about the grey zone. What of the innocents associated with said religion? You can't tell me there are none, because that would be impossible. Should they be treated with the same intolerance as their intolerant brethren? Or should we do something else. If so, what would we do? A legitimate question, not a criticism.

I think all we can do is show our intolerance to theirs. Reciprocity is fair play.

It is then to the innocent to reform their religion or get out of it because staying in it reinforces it and hinders reform.

Secular resistance and internal forces is what brought Christianity to heel and made it palatable to our civilization.

If Islam is immune to those and continue to attack the West and kill our people, the West will have little choice but to destroy Islam utterly and completely.

Regards
DL

Didnt you mentionthe golden rule in the OP?

And now you are writing about reciprocity...hmmm, those seem to be contradictory principles.

So if we accept reciprosity, then you are ok if they do drone stikes in the US?

feral botanist
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Jul 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 881
Location: in the dry land

01 Mar 2017, 6:22 pm

GnosticBishop wrote:

feral botanist wrote:

I would not put much faith in the analysis of U. S. security organizations as they are biased, -- as can be seen from the U.S. being so close and friendly with one of the worst human rights offenders in the world. Saudi Arabia.

Regards
DL

Really? Then who would you trust for an analysis of the security for the US?

You say that you want better vetting o immigrants, but you say you dont trust DHS or any of the other US security agencies.
Who would you have do this vetting?

GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

01 Mar 2017, 6:50 pm

feral botanist wrote:

GnosticBishop wrote:

feral botanist wrote:

GnosticBishop wrote:

You used the term racist right after mentioning Muslims. You also mentioned it in this post as well.

Muslims are not a race.

Regards
DL

GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

01 Mar 2017, 6:52 pm

feral botanist wrote:

GnosticBishop wrote:

feral botanist wrote:

Sorry, what does this have to do with your original thesis?

It just came to mind and it also involves Muslims and I thought you might have an intelligent reply.

Regards
DL

GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

01 Mar 2017, 6:56 pm

jrjones9933 wrote:

So, will a full Muslim ban satisfy you, or should we also round up and expel everyone who professes Islam?

I would prefer that Muslims reform Islam and their Sharia to a more moral ideology that is compatible to what the rest of the free world has.

That reform should begin with equality under the law.

Regards
DL

GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

01 Mar 2017, 7:00 pm

lidsmichelle wrote:

It is my personal opinion for sure, based on the data.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... SPvnFDDQHk

This next will lead you, if you want to do the legwork, to 28,000 others who likely agree with me.

http://www.therebel.media/tiffany_gabbay_april_19

Care to show your personal opinion of Islam and Sharia?

Regards
DL

GnosticBishop
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,686

01 Mar 2017, 7:04 pm

feral botanist wrote:

GnosticBishop wrote:

Farunel wrote:

The Golden Rule is a reciprocity rule.

To your question.
Yes. And they have in the sense that the planes they drove into the Twin Towers were manned drones.

Did you expect some other answer?

Regards
DL

Last edited by GnosticBishop on 01 Mar 2017, 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

01 Mar 2017, 7:04 pm

GnosticBishop wrote:

jrjones9933 wrote:

So, will a full Muslim ban satisfy you, or should we also round up and expel everyone who professes Islam?

I share that preference, but I don't see the measures I asked about as the logical alternative.

Also, this preoccupation with people emigrating to the US in order to impose Sharia confounds me. People emigrate to the US to escape Sharia, in its local incarnation. There is no great book of Sharia Law; it has lots of local variations.

Now, with regard to foreign policy, I have gone on a long time about our weird fascination with authoritarian regimes. Every time I hear about us making alliances with another one, I warn that it will backfire just like the others have. Democratic Muslim-majority countries are improving, with regard to their human rights, largely no thanks to US policy.

ahem, Putin, ahem

_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade

Page 3 of 11 [ 167 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 11 Next

Jump to:

Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee. Post Reply New Topic

Muslims say; religious freedom for me, but not for thee.