So one non-muslim country is trying to implement the death penalty for gays vs the 7 muslim countries who currently allow it. You think that is an argument in equating Christianity and and Islam as they currently stand then?
Sure, you can equate them. They’re both doing it for religious reasons. It’s just a difference in quantity.
And this is your example of national intolerance. Are you fucking kidding me? I weep for them just as I weep for the 87 people on American flight 11. I weep for them as I weep for the 60 people on United flight 175. I weep for them as I weep for the 59 people on American flight 77. I weep for them as I weep for the 40 people on flight United flight 93. I weep for them as I weep for the 2,606 people in buildings 1 and 2 of the World Trade center, many of them jumping to their deaths. I weep for them as I weep for the 125 people in the Pentagon.
Moving on to another day, I weep for the 13 people shot at Ft Hood by someone who took his religious instructions at an American mosque from an American educated Imam.
Want more or, do you want to start a spreadsheet comparing intolerance? Do you have enough tears for this conversation? Should I talk about the children on the plane who were riding without their parents and had to witness the terrorists cutting a flight attendant’s throat before they themselves died listening to the screams of the other passengers as they realized they were flying into a building? Should I post a video of as an American Jew getting his head cut off? Do the tears fall faster if I mention he had a name?
The reality is that for all the Pat Robertson’s who run their mouth they are not only harmless but would be met with deadly force by the vast majority of Americans if any attempt were made to do violence.
I’ll say it again, the United States is one of the most diverse and tolerant nations on the planet.
So, you agree that there are a larger number of nutters who follow Islam then? Btw, no one has said that Christianity doesn’t have its own ‘cross’ to bear.
Oh, that is so wrong, it’s impossible to say how wrong it is. Read any Christian writing of any tradition (excluding Gnostic & Marcionite) over the past 2000 years and they are obviously steeped in OT references. The NT was certainly seen as given primacy & the OT was interpreted through a Christian bias, but it still was revered as being the undergirding of the New Testament revelation of Christ.
No, I’d agree there are larger numbers of countries where the Muslim religion determines policy; I’ve met enough Christian nutters that I’d never claim there are less of them than Muslim nutters.
You can start by citing evidence of it instead of pulling opinion out of your ass or at least a certificate that you’re a psychic capable of reading minds.
Since you’re referring to Roberts as an extremist lets go with that. Where is the violence?
If you want to talk about the KKK that’s fine. the last time they showed up at my city they required police protection and 100 feet of fencing to keep us from tearing them apart. The level on community tolerance for them is pretty low.
Oh no, that was my example of extreme religious violence against gays, in a society which unlike Afghanistan isn’t routinely violent. My example of national intolerance is the current groundswell of frothing anti-Muslim activism in the US, which happens to be turning violent (see cabby thread for details).
IOW, your posts are my cite.
Actually I think it’s an argument for praising the effects of the Separation of Church and State. To be blunt, if some fundamentalist Christian groups could get away with government control on the level of Wahabi Islam in Saudi Arabia they would be as bad. What stops those Christians from getting so bad, isn’t their faith. It’s simply having strong opponents.
There is no ground swell of anti-muslim activism in the US.
Huh. I guess book barbecues must be one of those quaint US traditions that’s always been going on but no one mentionned in the brochures until now. Or mosque arsons. Or assault on Muslims. Or virulent attacks on Muslims all over the news, blogosphere and whatnot.
We have always been at war with Eastasia, then ? Cause you know, I could have sworn…
Book barbecues are non-violent freedoms of expressions and no mosques have been burned recently to my knowledge.
If you’re referring to the recent torching of construction equipment to build the Murfreesboro mosque expansion then you should be aware of the community support that came out in defense of the mosque.
We don’t have the social/religious disparity that exists in France. There is no government institution tasked with maintaining a cultural identity.
Well, the UK doesn’t really have separation of state and church, so that argument is somewhat moot.
Why don’t Muslim countries have that level of opposition then?
Yes, Pat Robertson has advocated violence:
Let the feverish back-pedalling begin.
And he later apologized for it. It was a short lived jihad on his part.
Because in (some) Muslim countries, theocrats had more rifles. Then the opposition sort of… yeah. In many cases, courtesy of the West, too.
Consider your knowledge widened. And that’s just what pops up in the first two Google pages.
Besides, intolerance is intolerance. Being nominally non-violent doesn’t make it any less hateful or outrageous. A peaceful KKK rally that ends with a burning cross in front of someone’s yard is non violent, too. Yet if it happened all over the place, I’d be worried all the same.
What does that have to do with anything ? Is that supposed to make it OK ? Does the violence not count if it’s denounced by others ? Do explain.
…
You’re just not paying attention, are you ?
Do you tolerate racists? Are you intolerant because you point out the flaws in their reasoning? There is a book that essentially condones the killing of people different than those who believe the message in it and we should be quiet about it? I don’t think so. Making noise, or even burning books, is a whole lot different than killing people.
[quote=“Kobal2, post:376, topic:550891”]
you went back 6 year to find grafiti , a failed arson and an actual arson on a mosque. Compare that to Churches burned. You are clueless regarding anything that resembles perspective in a country the size of the United States.
And no, intolerance is not intolerance when it comes to actual violence. Again, it’s a function of perspective.
So you retract your claim.
I can condemn racist actions without spewing drool-flecked spittle every time I mention the name of a person or group engaged in those actions.
No. There is not. There is a book in which a couple of passages, apparently written during a period of strife, encourage pretty merciless treatment of a group of people who were being accused of threatening the author of the book.
Said passages, of course, are easy fodder for those who deliberately pick and choose “quotations” when they need to stir up hatred and fear, but there is no book that actually says what you claim it says.