Enlil said:

They rent hotel rooms and shoot at people instead.  Or they blow up federal buildings.

---

Asclepius said:

Mad_Larkin said:

your degrees mean nothing to me. if you'd like to take issue with the points i made, please be my guest. try to be brief.

---

I already asked for you to expound upon your initial rebuttal to what I had written, I am fairly certain...

---

Asclepius said:

Enlil said:

They rent hotel rooms and shoot at people instead.  Or they blow up federal buildings.

---

"If I become president, I propose a total and complete shutdown of Christians entering the United States!" 

"Christians aren't bringing us their best.  They are not our friend, believe me.  They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

---

Mad_Larkin said:

Enlil said:

They rent hotel rooms and shoot at people instead.  Or they blow up federal buildings.

---

there is no evidence that either of those cases were religiously motivated.

Asclepius said:

Mad_Larkin said:

your degrees mean nothing to me. if you'd like to take issue with the points i made, please be my guest. try to be brief.

---

I already asked for you to expound upon your initial rebuttal to what I had written, I am fairly certain...

---

i'm sorry that you need me to expound.

---

I don't need you to.  It's cool if you can't. 

Mad_Larkin said:

Asclepius said:

Enlil said:

They rent hotel rooms and shoot at people instead.  Or they blow up federal buildings.

---

"If I become president, I propose a total and complete shutdown of Christians entering the United States!" 

"Christians aren't bringing us their best.  They are not our friend, believe me.  They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

---

false equivalence

---

Great Scott said:

This thread is currently being ruined by useless SJW idiots.

---

Mad_Larkin said:

your degrees mean nothing to me.

---

Mad_Larkin said:

---

One liners don't satisfy my intellectual curiosity; maybe they do it for Fox News viewers. 

Asclepius said:

BANANA.MAN said:

im not generalizing. when did i generalize? im saying there is a problem with islamic scripture. i never said all muslims are bad and ive said mtiple times that my problem is with ISLAM the ideology, not MUSLIMS the people. so how about you quit generalizing. just because someone has a problem with islam doesnt mean they dislike all muslims. ive had muslim friends and classmates my whole life. i dont hate them.

---

I am confused.  On the one hand, you say you do not have a problem with Muslims, but simultaneously have a problem with the Quran.  If you have a problem with the Surahs, is your dislike for those who practice their teachings not implicit?  I would not have come to that conclusion if you merely disagreed with the teachings of the Quran -- that's one thing.  But to treat the Quran like it is any different from all other religious texts, designating to it an extraordinary stigma, is something different altogether.  I will give you credit for your exegesis of Christian literary antiquity, in the traditional sense, albeit I firmly disagree with the validity of verbal plenary inspiration.  That said, your position on Islam is reminiscent of what I learned about the view held by Romans of the early Christians: they were seen by Rome as enemies of the people, haters of man, and Christianity viewed as one of the biggest threats to the existence of the empire (think Claudius and Nero Caesar). 


I wonder if Muslims in Spain felt the same way about Christianity -- that it was a vile religion.  Also, do you think Muslims branded Christianity an evil religion after the start of the Crusades?  What about Jewish people slaughtered by Christians during the Rhineland massacres? 


My point is this: if you disagree with the validity of religious texts, that is perfectly fine.  We can discuss the moral problems of every religion on a point by point basis.  But when you single out one religion, when many religions call for the unjust killing of innocents, including the Bible, that is when you open a door that can be dangerous.  I am not saying that you personally would cause harm to innocent Muslims, but people who have espoused your line of thinking have led many to commit atrocious acts.  Again, it is perfectly fine to address the problems of the Quran; it is another to pretend as though they are any viler than the teachings contained within the Bible.

---

Asclepius said:

If you would like, I can poke holes in your Christian theology as easily as you do with Quranic texts.  I get that you are merely trying to point out the flaws of Islam to justify your hatred of the religion (not of Muslim people), but I can point out just as many theological flaws with the Bible.  Does that mean I should support a Christian ban if one were proposed by a future administration?  Hm... 


In fact, I can unravel your entire Christian faith by discussing one theological problem, using proper exegesis, if you surrender yourself to the dilemma exposed with an objective mind.  Care to discuss it with me?  It doesn't mean I dislike Christians, even though I think the religion is flawed, and it doesn't give me the excuse to brand Christianity a special kind of evil.

---

BANANA.MAN said:

i used to be a huge liberal and i also used to defend islam. then i actualy learned about islam for myself instead of listening to people who shame you and say you are a bigot for questioning them

---

Great Scott said:

This thread is currently being ruined by useless SJW idiots.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

Great Scott said:

This thread is currently being ruined by useless SJW idiots.

---

Stupid Jesus Wackos?

---

Mad_Larkin said:

when Christians start blowing up children at concerts i'll be the first to denounce them.

---

Bubbles85 said:

So to summarize. The number of lefties that watched the video in the OP of this thread = 0

---

Mad_Larkin said:

there is no evidence that either of those cases were religiously motivated.

---

cogito69 said:

Bubbles85 said:

So to summarize. The number of lefties that watched the video in the OP of this thread = 0

---

The speaker was talking about destabilizing countries from within using citizens of the targeted country. He used the Russian Revolution as an example of how the ideologues would then be eliminated. The process wasn’t specific to Marxist takeovers, but to Russian techniques of destabilization from within.

The majority of misinformation that the Russians fed to the US electorate in the 2016 elections was aimed at the right, not the left. Their tactic of destabilization isn’t politically leftist. The goal is internal destabilization utilizing all groups, but especially the most gullible factions that they can identify to spread discord and fear.

---

Lmfao

Bubbles85 said:

cogito69 said:

Bubbles85 said:

So to summarize. The number of lefties that watched the video in the OP of this thread = 0

---

The speaker was talking about destabilizing countries from within using citizens of the targeted country. He used the Russian Revolution as an example of how the ideologues would then be eliminated. The process wasn’t specific to Marxist takeovers, but to Russian techniques of destabilization from within.

The majority of misinformation that the Russians fed to the US electorate in the 2016 elections was aimed at the right, not the left. Their tactic of destabilization isn’t politically leftist. The goal is internal destabilization utilizing all groups, but especially the most gullible factions that they can identify to spread discord and fear.

---

Lmfao

---