Germany Is A Christian Nation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Roo
    Member
    • Jun 2008
    • 3446

    #61
    Old Osama is a Wahhabist. His father was a Saudi. His organizations funnel a lot of money to their causes. And yes, being a Saudi outfit, we give them plenty of dough as well.

    Comment

    • devilock76
      Member
      • Aug 2010
      • 1737

      #62
      Originally posted by lxskllr View Post
      That's an individual action that only affects the individual. This, as well as your second example aren't the same thing at all. The Muslims are more like the Manson family, and with that being the case; Yes, they'd be convicted.
      How is my second example off the mark when your response to a musician singing about something, a something I do not define at all is suddenly evangelizing (your words) and guilty of a crime?

      I am trying to figure out where this slippery slope of yours plummets to a sheer cliff face.

      Ken

      Comment

      • tom502
        Member
        • Feb 2009
        • 8985

        #63
        if a singer says something, and a movie depicts something and someone follows to it, then it's the fault of the person. Islam though is a mass death cult with billions of brainwashed people, and it's considered a "religion". It's different. Though some could debate similarities, but while the individuals are at core fault of what they do, if the messenger is a big enough threat, then it should be closed down. If Benny Hinn said to kill non-believers and his believers acted on this, then Benny Hinn should be charged. If I watch the movie Wild Hogs and kill myself, the directer should not be charged, even though that's a terrible movie.

        Comment

        • lxskllr
          Member
          • Sep 2007
          • 13435

          #64
          Originally posted by devilock76 View Post
          How is my second example off the mark when your response to a musician singing about something, a something I do not define at all is suddenly evangelizing (your words) and guilty of a crime?

          I am trying to figure out where this slippery slope of yours plummets to a sheer cliff face.

          Ken
          Your problem is you're approaching it from a democratic standpoint. I already said my country would be a dictatorship. It's my way, or the highway. To answer your question though, the distinction is pretty clear to me. One thing is just a piece of artwork, and the other is the avocation of violence through institution. They really aren't anything alike, and trying to pair them is like forcing a square peg through no hole.

          Comment

          • lxskllr
            Member
            • Sep 2007
            • 13435

            #65
            Since we're using inappropriate examples. How is me burning down a mosque for the actions of the individual different from suing UPS when one of their drivers runs over a cyclist on the road? If anything, I'm more in the right for taking down their mosque, because the cause was largely the fault of the proprietor. UPS doesn't have control over a single driver on the road.

            Comment

            • justintempler
              Member
              • Nov 2008
              • 3090

              #66
              Excellent rant for those that didn't see it...

              Comment

              • jamesstew
                Member
                • May 2008
                • 1440

                #67
                I didn't write it but it's pretty good, I'd shuffle these five around a bit though:

                In a world predominately controlled by religious theists, it is necessary to know as much as possible about these faith-based institutions. With thousands of sects of dozens of major world religions becoming well-informed can be difficult, but with each belief system claiming superiority and condemning all others, it is a necessary endeavor. Most of you reading this have heard about the good components of each belief system from their faithful followers so here I will outline the top five worst religions, with justifications of course. So follow me blindly as I present to you the fifth worst religion of all time: Islam.

                5. Islam: This one is a given. Muslim hatred of the western way of life, and condemning of the ‘infidels’ has led to the death of millions in Jihad’s (Holy Wars- seems a bit contradictory, eh?) throughout time. Now, understand that these terror tactics are not condoned explicitly in the Qur’an, but the holy book has been used to justify them. The Muslim extremists believe that Allah wants them to kill the sinners- and by doing so they are dying for God and will be granted a wealth of prizes in the afterlife- (72 virgins, anyone?) As I previously mentioned, the most terrible aspects of this religion are propagated by extremists but they are dedicated to Islam and, without it, it would be extremely difficult to justify their horrific acts. Even outside the realm of the ‘killing-in-the-name-of-Go’ mentality, Islam is also a terrible religion because of the human rights abuses perpetrated by its followers, including the materialization, mistreatment, and outright abuse of women- or as they call them Second-Class Citizens. Terrorism, Jihads, Martyrdom, and abuse of women make Islam the fifth most terrible religion in the world!

                4. Jehovah’s Witnesses: Another pretty obvious choice, Jehovah’s Witnesses are primarily considered one of the worst religions because of their undignified attempts to spread their religion. Nobody wants to be disturbed at home to hear the evangelical ramblings of an ignorant person. One of my few joys in life used to be confronting these people and showing my superior knowledge of their own religion (along with its various weaknesses)- but over the years it became too easy as each practitioner knew less than the last and eventually they just revert back to the same tagline “The answer is in the bible.” As if the spreading of JW wasn’t bad enough, the belief system itself is riddled with contradictions and restorationism. For example, Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that there is no Hell, and that the soul and body both die together- Before you think “that seems rational”- consider that they believe that God resurrects the best members of the world to live in a new body after the end of the world- a number which is limited to 144,000. These 144,000 have already been chosen as well, so if you are a living Jehovah’s Witness today- you accept that you will die and your consciousness will not ascend to heaven but remain on earth with the remainder of the population. But keep knocking on those doors anyway! Though this religion is a branch of Christianity, I felt it deserved its own space as the fourth worst religion.

                3: Mormonism: Also known as the church of the Latter Day Saints (LDS) – This religious institution has a uniquely peculiar history. The church, introduced by Joseph Smith in Illinois in the 1840’s, is also known for their persistent attempts to convert potential believers using door-to-door guerilla tactics. Other reasons that this religion made the list include the absurd and racist beliefs, and the practice of polygamy by some LDS sects. Mormonism isn’t the most popular religion among younger generations, probably because of the dietary code called the Word of Wisdom, currently requiring abstinence from alcohol, tobacco, coffee, tea, and illegal drugs; caffeinated soft drinks are left to individual discretion. With only 12 million world-wide practitioners, this American religion needs all of the door to door salespeople it can get. – So next time you see a well-dressed man on a bike with a grey helmet, remember that they could be believers in the third worst religion of all time!

                2: Scientology: I bet you thought this would top the list!- Well it’s fairly close at the NUMBER TWO worst religion. The scientology fad has been spreading throughout the world thanks to endorsements by high-profile celebrities like Tom Cruise and John Travolta, but few people know what the belief system is based upon. Firstly, lets acknowledge that the founder (“profit”) of scientology, L. Ron. Hubbard, was a well-known SCIENCE-FICTION writer. The religion’s premise bears a striking resemblance to his fictional works- featuring alien life forms implanted in human’s brains that are responsible for misfortune, anxiety, and stress. As if this weren’t bad enough, Scientology practitioners have recently been flooded with accusations of greed, corruption, and scamming lawsuits because of the income that the church generates from books sales and new member fees.

                1: Christianity: YES, the number one WORST religion in the world is also the most popular, this is no coincidence. The more practitioners of a certain religion means the more opportunities to justify negative acts (including violence and bigotry) using their own misinterpretations of the texts. From the cultural genocide of the Native Americans and the bloody Crusades to bombing of women’s health clinics and the Ku Klux Klan, Christianity has been the number one justifier for murder, sexism, racism, gender discrimination, and more. Without this archaic institution (and others like it)- human beings would be forced to construct their own morality without basing their beliefs on outdated texts- this is a good thing because as our society develops, we learn. (Example: Slavery is not considered acceptable today, but three-hundred years ago (and in the bible) was a completely justifiable institution. Civil liberties have been limited in the United States by the government because of Christianity- even though our government was supposed to have been built on the premise of separation between Church and State. For example, if Christianity was not the force within our government that it is, the right to marry someone of the same sex would be a little debated issue- it seems like common sense to me. So for all of these reasons, and more- Christianity is the worst religion of all!

                Comment

                • lxskllr
                  Member
                  • Sep 2007
                  • 13435

                  #68
                  That's a pretty good list. I'd really only consider the Muslims and Christians dangerous though. The others are mostly dangerous to themselves, and in the case of Scientology paid for by their members. If they feel like they're getting good value for their money, more power to them.

                  Comment

                  • devilock76
                    Member
                    • Aug 2010
                    • 1737

                    #69
                    Originally posted by tom502
                    Islam though is a mass death cult with billions of brainwashed people, and it's considered a "religion".
                    And to think I doubted your understanding of religious tolerance. Egg on my face for sure!

                    Ken

                    Comment

                    • devilock76
                      Member
                      • Aug 2010
                      • 1737

                      #70
                      Originally posted by lxskllr
                      Your problem is you're approaching it from a democratic standpoint. I already said my country would be a dictatorship. It's my way, or the highway. To answer your question though, the distinction is pretty clear to me. One thing is just a piece of artwork, and the other is the avocation of violence through institution. They really aren't anything alike, and trying to pair them is like forcing a square peg through no hole.
                      So wait which one is artwork and which one is avocation, Music or Films? You gave different answers for each. I mean regardless of the form of government I am hoping your internal dialog has some consistency.

                      Ken

                      Comment

                      • tom502
                        Member
                        • Feb 2009
                        • 8985

                        #71
                        I think you fail to understand the word "tolerance". Tolerance does not mean you have to agree with it, or accept it. It means you tolerate it. I mean, while I do have critical views of Islam, which I believe are substantiated, I tolerate it's existence, and would not personally inhibit people to practice it. I would approve of Muslims being given freedom to choose their path as a personal faith, and to leave it if desired. Which is usually not the case. But while I disagree with Islam, I tolerate it's existence. I think we all do, we have to.

                        Comment

                        • devilock76
                          Member
                          • Aug 2010
                          • 1737

                          #72
                          Originally posted by lxskllr View Post
                          Since we're using inappropriate examples. How is me burning down a mosque for the actions of the individual different from suing UPS when one of their drivers runs over a cyclist on the road? If anything, I'm more in the right for taking down their mosque, because the cause was largely the fault of the proprietor. UPS doesn't have control over a single driver on the road.
                          So are you saying that the preacher or imam or what have you of a religious order, even if it is enormous, they have control over every single person in that order and what they do? Am I understanding that logic path right. So if someone who watched a television preacher commited a sex act that television preacher should be put on the sex offender list. I mean he influenced this person of course because he told them that Jesus said to love the little children, right?

                          Hyperbole I know but I am trying to use it as a device to a point. The point being how can any single person be responsible for all the corrupted ways any random sicko can reinterpret and misinterpret their words?

                          Ken

                          Comment

                          • justintempler
                            Member
                            • Nov 2008
                            • 3090

                            #73
                            Scientology is a cult. They prey on people when they are going through a crisis. They have audting sessions, like going to confession, where you expose all the things you've done wrong in life (cheat on your wife, steal from your employer...). They videotape those sessions and then have the power to blackmail anyone trying to leave the church. One of the first things they do is have you fill out a questionaire, so they know how to help you. What you've just done is give them a roadmap to your personal pysche so they know which of your emotional buttons to push.

                            Being where I am here in Florida, I get exposed to a lot of Scientology news from local media.

                            Comment

                            • devilock76
                              Member
                              • Aug 2010
                              • 1737

                              #74
                              Originally posted by tom502 View Post
                              I think you fail to understand the word "tolerance". Tolerance does not mean you have to agree with it, or accept it. It means you tolerate it. I mean, while I do have critical views of Islam, which I believe are substantiated, I tolerate it's existence, and would not personally inhibit people to practice it. I would approve of Muslims being given freedom to choose their path as a personal faith, and to leave it if desired. Which is usually not the case. But while I disagree with Islam, I tolerate it's existence. I think we all do, we have to.
                              I am pretty sure most would agree that calling an entire religion a 'mass death cult' and 'brainwashed' would be viewed as intolerant. I mean me saying Christians are Zombie Worshiping Prudes might be something I can argue my way to being accurate but isn't exactly coming from a very tolerant mindset when describing them.

                              Ken

                              Comment

                              • devilock76
                                Member
                                • Aug 2010
                                • 1737

                                #75
                                I will confess as although I argue one side of this mess I consider all ORGANIZED religions nothing more than archaic institutes of control. I am going to expose my paradox to be fair to the discussion at hand.

                                However that being said I find it hard in cases where there are people who will use any words they want to justify their actions, it appropriate to blame the source of those words as opposed to the actions of the extreme.

                                Ken

                                Comment

                                Related Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X