patrick.net

It's ultimately all the fault of a vast right wing conspiracy. Conceptions of slavery in Biblical days are discussed at length from the perspectives of both Islam and Christianity. Not one mention in the whole story of world-wide terrorism that began back in the early 70's by that paragon of peace Yasser Arafat and has continued unabated that would tend to make one phobic of Islam. I wonder how many night clubs would have to be bombed or people blown up in the public square before we're allowed to question Islam?

Phobia is an unreasoning fear.

Given what happens in Sweet Den, Yer Money, and the rest of Western Europe on a near-daily basis, it's a completely reasonable fear.

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

Sweet Den, Yer Money

I'll admit it took me a second!

P N Dr Lo R says

I wonder how many night clubs would have to be bombed or people blown up in the public square before we're allowed to question Islam?

As long as tolerance of Islamic violence makes lefties feel good about their own virtue, we will never be allowed to question Islam. The only thing that might change leftist thinking, unfortunately, is Islamic attacks on the very centers of leftist intolerance for free speech, like Berkeley and Cambridge.

A lot of gay people woke up after Orlando and started looking at the facts about Islam instead of just accepting the feel-good self-congratulatory rhetoric of the left. It will take similar attacks on Berkeley and Cambridge before they start to understand that Islam will always hate them and try to kill them, because contempt for all non-Muslims is the core message of Islam.

rando says

Islamic violence makes lefties feel good about their own virtu

Lefties lack virtue - this is what has brought America to the brink of implosion. its been an issue well before Montesquieu wrote about Leftists over 200 year hence.

rando says

P N Dr Lo R says

I wonder how many night clubs would have to be bombed or people blown up in the public square before we're allowed to question Islam?

As long as tolerance of Islamic violence makes lefties feel good about their own virtue, we will never be allowed to question Islam. The only thing that might change leftist thinking, unfortunately, is Islamic attacks on the very centers of leftist intolerance for free speech, like Berkeley and Cambridge.

We are allowed to question Islam with the freedoms the constitution gives us. It's the Muslims who deny us that freedom if we say anything they don't like in public.

This article rings true to me. One thing that I didn't realize is that Islam and Western countries outlawed slavery around the same time - Saudi Arabia was a laggard, allowing slavery up to 1960 when we merely didn't allow blacks to use our water fountains or go to school with our kids. We definitely led the way there.

A big part of the article is that this guy is trying to use the same somewhat twisted logic to excuse the slavery in the Koran that Christians use to excuse the slavery in both Testaments. It's funny watching Christians say that this is bullshit when a Muslim does it. But they don't even realize that their same preachers are using the same bankrupt argument. Both religions have to admit that their books are wrong or that God is OK with slavery. Why do Christians exist in such cognitive dissonance? Instead of doing this, they come up with some rationalization to say that somehow the slavery was much different and it was a different world, where people didn't have enough options to live, yada yada, so they can keep the same holy book.

YesYNot says

A big part of the article is that this guy is trying to use the same somewhat twisted logic to excuse the slavery in the Koran that Christians use to excuse the slavery

He's trying to make a moral equivalence between Christianity and Islam by talking about slavery when the obvious difference between the two faiths is the continual terrorism perpetrated by followers of Islam, which conveniently isn't even mentioned.

P N Dr Lo R says

when the obvious difference between the two faiths is the continual terrorism perpetrated by followers of Islam, which conveniently isn't even mentioned.

That's not a difference in the religion. That's a difference in the followers of the religions, and it only applies to what is happening today. You want it to mean that there is an inherent difference in the religion, but it does not. All you have to do is look at how the different religion's followers behaved during different times to see that. You are ignoring the obvious difference between how Christians behaved 2000 years ago and how they behaved now. How can you justify that so many Christians thought that slavery was natural and acceptable? If your only way to accept it is to say that Christians today are good because they aren't terrorists, don't keep slaves, and don't rape, then you have to throw away your holy book and accept that it is wrong just like the Koran is wrong and just like the ISIS version of Islam is wrong.

YesYNot says

Christians today are good because they aren't terrorists, don't keep slaves, and don't rape

Sounds good to me.

P N Dr Lo R says

Sounds good to me.

Then admit that the Bible is wrong (both Testaments), and Christians are doing OK in spite of it.

YesYNot says

Christians are doing OK

Because the Bible is right and you're wrong.

You think that Christians are good because they don't have slaves, and that the Bible is right, even though it condones slavery. How did you get your brain into such a pretzel?

YesYNot says

That's not a difference in the religion. That's a difference in the followers of the religions

Love it. And the credit goes to secularism.

Strategist says

Love it. And the credit goes to secularism.

Yep. The least bad religion is the one that veers the farthest from an originalist perspective. In other words, the best religion is the one that is least faithful to the original tenants. The problem with Christians who fail to condone the book and come up with a contorted explanation for it is the same as the problem when Muslim's do it. It leaves open the door for a fundamentalist coming back later and start using the same book to justify killing, slaver, rape, or whatever.

YesYNot says

Strategist says

Love it. And the credit goes to secularism.

Yep. The least bad religion is the one that veers the farthest from an originalist perspective. In other words, the best religion is the one that is least faithful to the original tenants. The problem with Christians who fail to condone the book and come up with a contorted explanation for it is the same as the problem when Muslim's do it. It leaves open the door for a fundamentalist coming back later and start using the same book to justify killing, slaver, rape, or whatever.

Religions reflect the morals of the times in which it was created. Religions don't evolve to keep up with changing times and morals. The only other solution is a secular state where religious laws and practices are prohibited. Ofcourse, most religious people will end up reinterpreting the word of God to keep up with changing times, and prevent their religion from falling apart.

Strategist says

Ofcourse, most religious people will end up reinterpreting the word of God to keep up with changing times, and prevent their religion from falling apart.

Yeah, and this is one reason for all of the splits in religion over time. As long as the texts are taken seriously, risk is there that they will be taken literally and used to justify x,y,z. The only cure for this is to stop taking the texts so seriously.

Strategist says

The only other solution is a secular state where religious laws and practices are prohibited

i.e., the Soviet Union?

P N Dr Lo R says

Strategist says

The only other solution is a secular state where religious laws and practices are prohibited

i.e., the Soviet Union?

Soviet Union sucks, so let me revise that.
The only other solution is a secular state where certain religious laws and practices are prohibited. Secular laws must take precedence.

Strategist says

Secular laws must take precedence.

They do in the US. The difference between the US and Soviet Union is not a presence or absence of religion. The communists were atheists, but that doesn't make atheists communists. It also doesn't mean that all of the evils of various communist states can be attributed to atheism.

The linked article says, "Brown is now a professor of Islamic studies at Georgetown University, where he directs the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. He's also a convert to Islam." The author is an assistant editor at Foreign Policy.

Anyone reading that propaganda should also read "How Saudi Arabia captured Washington".

The author laments that people are figuring out what Islam says and what KSA is doing. She calls it a "phobia," but it isn't. Islamic terrorism and sharia have actually happened, are now happening, and are likely to continue until they are stopped. Reacting to people who say you should be killed and are trying to do it isn't a "phobia." The author pretends that the Islamic State isn't Islamic, as if it were the Quaker State or something. The caliph of the Islamic State, Big Daddy Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi, has a PhD in Islamic Studies. He is a Muslim from a Muslim family in a Muslim community in a Muslim country. His followers read from texts that 90% of Muslims hold sacred, and use those texts to justify every atrocity. Chapter 8 of the Koran says to strike terror into the enemies of Allah, both those whom you know, and those whom you do not know. This is literally chapter and verse. The author is demonstrating precisely the deceit (taqiyyeh) that she calls imaginary.

I lose patience with people who say religions are all the same. It's like saying books are all the same. I suppose if your only use for books is to throw them into a fire, then they all burn similiarly. If you take the time to read them, you see they differ quite profoundly, one from another.

This particular article goes on and on about the topic of slavery, presumably to cloud the differences between Islam and Christianity. Both of those religions condoned slavery for a long time. Islam differs in that it commands believers to conquer and subjugate disbelievers, to impose Sharia upon everyone everywhere, and to strike terror into the enemies of Allah. Sometimes public relations deception takes the form of false frames, confining the discourse to ambiguous topics where all sides have some guilt. Don't be deceived. When you fall into that trap, you can overlook the actual differences. That's the point. It's a strategem. That isn't a phobia, it's an evidence-based assessment of an extremely resourceful public relations campaign that has been widely described from Molenbeek to DC. Literally billions of Petrodollars have bought this river of BS. You're reading the consequence of America's decision to pay people who would kill us, for permission to buy oil that they would simply have taken from us. Over and over again, the Koran calls Allah the best deceiver, and the followers of the dead charlatan Mohamed follow his example. The Judeo-Christian Bible had expressly many authors, some of whom disagreed with each other. Islam had officially only one, who could change his mind so later verses abrogate earlier ones; the charlatan Mohamed prided himself on conquering infidels including specifically by deceit.

YesYNot says

This article rings true to me. One thing that I didn't realize is that Islam and Western countries outlawed slavery around the same time - Saudi Arabia was a laggard, allowing slavery up to 1960 when we merely didn't allow blacks to use our water fountains or go to school with our kids. We definitely led the way there.

They didn't do so voluntarily. Soon after the West banned slavery, and William Wilburforce was the first man in recorded history to get a government to ban slavery outright, we developed the Steam Engine. That FINALLY allowed European ships to capture Arab Slave Ships, Xebecs and Galleys, with oar-power, who previously could flee into the wind from sail-only European Warships. Previous to this, Arab Slave Galleys raided as fair as Ireland and Iceland, not in the distant past, but as recently as the time of the French Revolution.

The French, Spanish, and Italians in North Africa ended Arab Slavery at European's gunpoint; the British did the same off West Africa and in the Indian Ocean.

It's notable that Saudi Arabia only ended slavery under good old Whatabouttery Pressure from the Cold War. De facto, of course, Slavery is endemic in the Persian Gulf; almost everything FIFA related, for example, will be built with slave labor, as was most of Dubai, Al-Kuwait, Manama, etc.

We just saw how Filipino leaders react to KSA "requests", and are notorious for ignoring the plight of their own "Guest Workers" abroad.

Many Sunni Imams preach that banning slavery is un-Islamic.

Strategist says

Soviet Union sucks, so let me revise that.

Don't like the Soviet Union, then name your poison: China, Cuba, Venezula, Khmer Rouge, North Korea, the principle is still the same. Like Mary and her lamb, where Marxism goes atheism is sure to follow, in fact it's the heart and soul of Marxism. The irony is there is more hostility to Christianity in this country today than in the former Soviet Union where the gospel is welcomed with enthusiasm.

YesYNot says

It also doesn't mean that all of the evils of various communist states can be attributed to atheism.

No, it's just a huge coincidence.

curious2 says

This particular article goes on and on about the topic of slavery, presumably to cloud the differences between Islam and Christianity

So do some commenters, pretending they don't know the differences.

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

The French, Spanish, and Italians in North Africa ended Arab Slavery at European's gunpoint;

Reminds me of the American South ending slavery at the north's gun point.

P N Dr Lo R says

Marxism goes atheism is sure to follow,

But the reverse is not true. P N Dr Lo R says

The irony is there is more hostility

If expressing an opinion is hostility, you are right. On the other hand, that would make Christianity terribly hostile as well.

YesYNot says

Reminds me of the American South ending slavery at the north's gun point.

Yep.

Algeria and Egypt ended Slavery at gunpoint of the Colonialist powers.

curious2 says

I lose patience with people who say religions are all the same.

I'm not saying that they are the same. But they share some of the same problems. The main issue identified in this thread is that they were written in a time when some currently abhorred things were accepted. To survive, Christianity neutered itself and became more secular. In the other thread about trump and evangelical Christians, they point out that the only thing evangelicals care about anymore is abortion and gay sex. So they have given up caring about their own actions, and just want to bitch about the gays and baby killers. At least they have stopped bashing Jews in public.

P N Dr Lo R says

Strategist says

Soviet Union sucks, so let me revise that.

Don't like the Soviet Union, then name your poison: China, Cuba, Venezula, Khmer Rouge, North Korea, the principle is still the same. Like Mary and her lamb, where Marxism goes atheism is sure to follow, in fact it's the heart and soul of Marxism. The irony is there is more hostility to Christianity in this country today than in the former Soviet Union where the gospel is welcomed with enthusiasm.

By Dan and some of his naive liberal friends.
The people like me, Bill Maher, Richard Dawkins, Chris Hitchens, Ayaan Hirschi, Sam Harris know the real threat comes from those who want to kill us, not those who want to let us live.

If all religion is equally poisonous, show me an established (not a cult) religion that is as poisonous as Islam.

I think the Thugees were the last group you could remotely consider, but they were a cult and didn't go around evangelizing to potential converts or killing kaffirs.

Compare the number of fatalities from Militant Christiansin the name of Christianity in the past 10 years in the USA to the number of Islamic-cause fatalities. Not even close. This leads to the situation where the same people who bend over backward to apologize for Islamic terror literally beg for the next attack to have been caused by a "White Guy".

Then keep in mind the widespread access to firearms and the huge discrepancy between the number of Christians and Muslims in the USA.

This mentality goes right into the heart of our Political Class, just ask John Podesta:
" Better if a guy named Sayeed Farouk was reporting that a guy named Christopher Hayes was the shooter."
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/11500

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

If all religion is equally poisonous, show me an established (not a cult) religion that is as poisonous as Islam.

How about Buddhism? ... Nah, all they do is meditate peacefully.
How about Jainism? ........Nah, they won't even step on an ant.
How about Christianity?...Nah, they just follow secular laws.
How about Judaism?........Nah, they don't even believe their own crap.
How about Hinduism?......Nah, they don't get 72 virgins. Why bother with suicide bombing.

I guess there is no other religion as poisonous as the only peaceful religion, Islam.

Strategist says

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

If all religion is equally poisonous, show me an established (not a cult) religion that is as poisonous as Islam.

How about Buddhism? ... Nah, all they do is meditate peacefully.

How about Jainism? ........Nah, they won't even step on an ant.

How about Christianity?...Nah, they just follow secular laws.

How about Judaism?........Nah, they don't even believe their own crap.

How about Hinduism?......Nah, they don't get 72 virgins. Why bother with suicide bombing.

I guess there is no other religion as poisonous as the only peaceful religion, Islam.

Time to defang Islam.