Muslims Are INSANE

[Sportsdude]

They have had some fare ups in thialand over the years but overall they are the most peaceful.  The flare ups are because in thialand they are out numbered by the muslims and sooner or later there is going to be a war over thialand due to the two conflicts of religion and ideaology.

[Witch]

Yessiree wrote:
What kind of religion says it's okay to kill you for drawing a cartoon? The Muslim religion does. No wonder people think Muslims are f*cking headcases.

 

[SPAN class=headlineblack]From CBS News[/SPAN]

[SPAN class=headlineblack]Nigerian Christians Mob Muslims [/SPAN]

[SPAN class=bodysmall]ONITSHA, Nigeria, Feb. 23, 2006[/SPAN]

[TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=250 align=left border=0][TBODY][TR][TD class=bodysmall width=244][DIV id=pictures][img]http://www.cbsnews.com/images/2006/02/23/imageXGO10902231412.jpg" width=244 vspace=3](AP)

[/DIV][/TD][TD width=6]
[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]

[DIV class=body](AP) Christians in this southern Nigerian city burned Muslim corpses and defaced wrecked mosques Thursday, showing little repentance after days of sectarian violence that has killed more than 120 people across the country.

Onitsha has borne the brunt, with at least 80 of the deaths. The violence followed weekend protests over the publication of cartoons of Muhammad, the Islamic prophet.

"We don't want these mosques here anymore. These people are causing all the problems all over the world because they don't fear God," said 34-year Ifeanyi Ese, standing amid the concrete rubble of an Onitsha mosque.

With a crowd gathered, Ese angrily scrawled "Mohammed is a man, but Jesus is from above" on a shattered mosque wall with a burned stick.
[/DIV]
 

 

[kitten]

Ain't religion wonderful!  It gives people the moral justification to do anything they want,  and leaves their "god" responsible for the ensuing mess.

[tenkani]

My prophet can beat up your prophet?[/DIV]f*cks sake, isn't it about time humanity grew out of its adolescence?[/DIV]Do we really need these kind of stone-age fairy tales just to make it through life?Is it necessary to go crazy just to stay sane??

[New Guy]

Thanks, Witch, I was going to post the same. It seems like allreligions have their idiots who love the peace of their faith so much,they are willing to kill, kill, kill for it. Also, remember when theLast Temptation of Christ was released? Admittedly, you did not haveworldwide mass protests, but certainly in the states theatres showingthe film were picketed in an effort to stop people from seeing themovie.

It's a sad indictment of, as tenkani above says,  the adolesence of our species.

[Gopher]

Sportsdude wrote:
 Its always the extreme's of each religion that ruin the party.

Christian fundies in this country

Extreme Orthodox Jews- in Isreal

Fundimentalist Muslims

Moaist Rebels in Nepal- (they are the worst out all these groups by the way, don't go to nepal, its in anarchy)

Budist Monks are known to get testy

Hindu

Shiks


Every religion has a dark side.  Its are responsibility to see thru the dark stuff and see the good in people.[/DIV]
 Quakers are pretty good at seeing through the dark stuff...

[kitten]

Gopher wrote:
 Quakers are pretty good at seeing through the dark stuff...[/DIV]
 So are agnostics and atheists.

[Trollio]

First time I've seen this thread.
 
 Gopher wrote:
 Quakers are pretty good at seeing through the dark stuff...
 
 Gopher, you cannot possibly be a Quaker (can you?), or know too many of them.  I've known Quakers who, for all their pacifism, are some of the most intellectually violent people on the planet. I know what you mean, the whole quiet and the inner light thing of course, but people are people. Quakers themselves joke about this, and they have serious family-renting arguments over the spelling and pronunciation of words. (I've heard this crazy story about semantics from three different devout Quakers in different places with no relation to each other.)
 
 
Tenkani, check out the work of Yukio Mishima. He'll tell you fairly quick about the flaws of Buddhist monks. The eastern religions are no better than the ones that came out of the Levant. Most monks are monks for a period of time, then they go back to their regular lives. Those regular lives could involve all sorts of debauchery, and then they can go back to being a monk again at any time. Many people are romanced by eastern religions for one reason or another after reading a primer on their belief system. The reality is often much different. Then there's that bit about Gautama not allowing women to become monks for 500 years because it would "delay enlightenment".
 
 To our Wiccan friend, yes, I'm sure they all look alike to you, especially from your perspective of being shunned or persecuted by their followers, but there is a world of difference between Judaism and Christianity on the one hand and Islam on the other. Islam is actually closer in its structural origins to Mormonism (not in doctrine, but in how it came to be a religion from the musings of one individual).
 
 The "truth" is where you find it. Each religion has a version of the "golden rule," and many are derived in great part from those that came before them.
 

[Gopher]

Trollio wrote:
First time I've seen this thread.

Gopher wrote:
 [SPAN style="FONT-STYLE: italic"]Quakers are pretty good at seeing through the dark stuff...[/SPAN]

Gopher, you cannot possibly be a Quaker (can you?), or know too many of them.  I've known Quakers who, for all their pacifism, are some of the most intellectually violent people on the planet. I know what you mean, the whole quiet and the inner light thing of course, but people are people. Quakers themselves joke about this, and they have serious family-renting arguments over the spelling and pronunciation of words. (I've heard this crazy story about semantics from three different devout Quakers in different places with no relation to each other.)

  Trollio, I DO know a lot of Quakers and I'd be the first to agree with you about the matter of semantics: my point was that in matters of comprehensivity re. the matter, and acceptability of the 'inner core' of other religions, they're right on the ball.


Tenkani, check out the work of Yukio Mishima. He'll tell you fairly quick about the flaws of Buddhist monks. The eastern religions are no better than the ones that came out of the Levant. Most monks are monks for a period of time, then they go back to their regular lives. Those regular lives could involve all sorts of debauchery, and then they can go back to being a monk again at any time. Many people are romanced by eastern religions for one reason or another after reading a primer on their belief system. The reality is often much different. Then there's that bit about Gautama not allowing women to become monks for 500 years because it would "delay enlightenment".

To our Wiccan friend, yes, I'm sure they all look alike to you, especially from your perspective of being shunned or persecuted by their followers, but there is a world of difference between Judaism and Christianity on the one hand and Islam on the other. Islam is actually closer in its structural origins to Mormonism (not in doctrine, but in how it came to be a religion from the musings of one individual).

The "truth" is where you find it. Each religion has a version of the "golden rule," and many are derived in great part from those that came before them.
 
 

[Gopher]

Trollio wrote:
Alas, I am smitten....

Smote?...

Or am I simply smut?

And in doing so, is Gopher proving my point?

[SPAN style="FONT-STYLE: italic"][SPAN style="COLOR: rgb(0,0,127)"]"...Quakers who, for all their pacifism, are some of the most intellectually violent people on the planet."

He or she could well have done so!
[/SPAN][/SPAN]  
 

[Trollio]

LOL.  I remember a discussion I had with a Quaker friend about how her father would become seriously physically irate whenever someone said the word "cheeseburger". He insisted that it was a "hamburger with cheese" because the thing itself was not made of cheese.
 
 There were some other examples like this, but you can see why you don't want to be on the wrong side of a Quaker on a debating team. Their point is getting to the heart of why we do and say what we do, and not just accepting it as given. A highly admirable quality, but also a bit dangerous in some parts of Pennsylvania.