It won’t change his mind but the logical response is to point out he too is being subjective. He choose one religion and it’s dictates over another, that is the definition of subjective, choosing A over B.
Incredible, the bigotry of collective race or ethnicity responsibility… And your ignorance.
Muslim hostility?
You know very little of the history of the Palestinians, who are not only Muslim but Christian. And among the most important leadership of the anti-Israeli factions was always the Chrisitans Palestinians.
It is gross bigotry and gross ignorance to make your statement.
I have no personal responsibility for either of the sides of the conflict.
I submit you are blind with hatred and paranoia, and the analogy to the nazi rhetorician using pretend limitation to his hatreds is exactly a fit.
Valteron:
Our enemies recruit the foolish with lies about how we are at war with Islam. Thing is, even if that were so, it would be necessary for us to pretend that it isn’t, because making your enemy stronger by making his propaganda more effective is *tres dumfuque, mais non?
*
So, really, as a matter of tactics, maybe you ought to shut up about it?
There is only one Quran, and so?
Fearful of an enemy’s propaganda, are we?
That’s quite the standard for quelling uneasy truths.
I am convinced there is just one way to speak to a person like my Canadian Muslim correspondent, Beniyouha. I have posted my reply, which is:
“You have no proof that Allah exists or that Mohammed is his messenger. You obviously base your opinion on these unproven assertions, so there is no point arguing with you. As long as you live peacefully in a free and democratic Canada, I will respect and defend your right to believe as you want. The day you or your kind try to impose Islam and sharia law on my country, you will literally have to do it over my dead body. We believe in our freedom and will defend it to the death. Discussion closed.”
They take a literal interpretation of the Book?
May I please ask what ethnicity or race Muslims are, in your opinion? I have never seen “Islam” in any lists of ethnic groups or races.
Since the vast majority of westerners have never cracked open a Koran, they imagine it is full of nice, soothing things, sort of like a cross between "Desiderata and the Sermon on the Mount.
When you read it as I have (Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthall translation) you realize it is one of the angriest, most hostile, most violent books ever written. It actually tells Muslims to crucify their enemies, and that they can beat the wives “from whom ye fear rebellion”. (Yes, yes, let’s hear the bit about how you can only use a popsicle stick to beat her. That is NOT part of the Koran btw.
There is some belief among westerners ignorant of the true content of the Koran that people like the ISIS fanatics and Al-Qaeda are just people who didn’t attend Koran classes and got a twisted version of Islam. The fact is that there is NOT A FRIGGIN’ THING ISIS DOES that cannot be fully supported by the Koran and the Hadiths.
Mohammed defiantly seems obsessed with the idea of a “painful doom” for his enemies and non believers
That is the problem. How sure are you that Mohammed would have disagreed with this guy’s point of view? He is saying that the divine plan as given to Mohammed is better than any plan of law and government that humans could come up with. He says that anyone who abandons Islam deserves to die. Can you seriously tell me, if you have read the Koran and the Hadiths, that Mohammed would not have agreed?
That is the problem with westerners. They figure that since Jesus was a harmless hippie who got himself crucified by the power structure, and since Buddha was a quiet guy who did a lot of meditation, therefore ALL founders of religions must be like that. Westerners cannot understand that Mohammed attacked and raided caravans, had people pulled apart by horses, told his followers they could keep women captured in war as sex slaves, and was generally a very violent and conquering leader.
Going back all the way to the OP, I would have said there is no more trying to “reason” someone like the OP example into moderation, than there is trying to “reason” a Jack Chick-type Fundamentalist Christian into accepting that gays and Catholics are OK, or an Aryan Nation fanatic into accepting that ethnoculturally diverse immigration is a benefit and not a threat.
In all those cases it’s a position arrived at NOT through reason, so reason cannot be the tool to move them, and to the contrary, individuals such as the one mentioned in the OP believe that the reasoned humanistic point of view is inherently defective as it is not anchored to something greater and more immutable than the finite and fallible human mind.
Which observations of course do nothing to help as I return y’all to your ongoing regularly-scheduled shouting match.
Since you do not know arabic, this makes me laugh.
Of course it is false this statement as there is not a justification, to use a clear example , in Quran to break the peace and attack people living under a government with the Muslims who have not attacked you first.
The attacks on the yazidis are a clear violation of the quranic injunctions and of the standard hadiths and the standards of the classical law understanding of these terms.
This is only one example.
Of course like any text of any religion, persons who are mentally ill can twist and find justification for any action.
This is not news.
But your false assertions based on repeating the bigotted distortions and falsehoods show me nothing more than a hysteric and paranoid hatred which pretends in a transparent way not to be about hatred of all muslims.
But I do see you actually are in some youtubing commentary debate… Well this is simply a waste…
In any case there is no debate, it is another Val ranting about the muslims and how we are evil devils worshiping an evil religion
so Evil Muslims!!! Did you know, Evil Muslims!!! And did you know Evil Muslims!!!
Et voila
You mean like when Mohammed encourages Muslims to set all male slaves free but says it’s ok to keep females as sex slaves and that you can have sex with them whenever you want
or is that just a bigoted distortion of the text???
I keep getting this “you do not know Arabic” excuse from Muslim apologists. Christians never say you can’t understand the New Testament if you don’t know ancient Greek.
Are you seriously telling me that an immortal, all-knowing and all-powerful being communicated what would be (if it were true) the most important message ever communicated to mankind, but couldn’t express himself in anything but a language that has never been spoken by anything but a small minority of humanity?
And what proportion of the world’s Muslims speak fluent Arabic TODAY? What proportion of the world’s population? So why is it so impossible to understand what Alllah is saying in translation, anyhow? And why did Allah do such a poor job of making his holy word available to the vast majority of humanity?
:rolleyes: that white americans think they have anything to say …
It is boring to have people play “let us search for the snippets of text that can be misquoted and distorted or played for pretend shock”
It is boring for the bible as it is for the Quran and has been done many times here already.
the religious bigots can play their games
Yes, Robert, it would seem that the following are all delusions on our part.
Muslims can keep captured women for sex, even if they are married:
Surah 4:24 And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you.
4:34 Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them.
Look, I could go all night with examples, but I think I’ll go watch TV.
I read about a third of an English translation of the Quran before crapping out from boredom. Maybe I’ll pick it up again someday, but what I read didn’t horrify me like, say, the Aztec religion of human sacrifice does. Ever read the Bible? It too can support Quakers or the Inquisition, depending on what you take from it.
It’s hard to get anyone to change their mind on anything, but you reason with someone like that with better Muslim arguments. Expecting him to abandon his entire world view is really a losing battle.
please tell me how that is supposed to be taken out of context!!!