(December 7, 2015 at 6:03 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:

(December 7, 2015 at 10:57 am)Irrational Wrote: That's South America. Different times and environments yield different patterns of behaviour. You want recent examples where Christians have killed in the name of Jesus, there's the Middle East (and specifically Lebanon, if you want a specific example). Even after the civil war long gone in Lebanon, Christian party members still have not gotten over their lust to fight and kill, and they have certainly done so "in the name of Jesus". For the record, in Lebanon, there is not much difference in privilege and rights between Christians and Muslims. And so it makes sense they do not really behave all that differently from each other there. Even Hizballah is not more extreme than, say, Lebanese Forces or SSNP (both Christian groups).

You don't think that Islam has shaped the environment and culture of the middle east?

The question is a little loaded. Do you mean fully shaped? Or partially shaped? Because infinite factors shape cultures and environments. And if Islam is one of them, so is Christianity.

(December 8, 2015 at 5:16 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: [quote='God of Mr. Hanky']
[quote pid='1135441' dateline='1449530533']
Muslims do respond when terror attacks shock the world, but on social horrors which you would probably not wish to see practiced in your own neighborhood, very little is said. These fundamental problems relate directly to the personality of Mohammad, whose tale was written not by people who were not the product of Greek culture, but of desert raiding, horse-stealing, woman-beating, and slave-marketing machismo. Reform of a religion is much easier when you have a compassionate hippie dude like Jesus as your central figure to look to for behavioral standards, while a dick like Mohammad, remembered as he is, is keeping Muslims forever in the 7th Century. You cannot criticize what he did without denying him as your holy man, a serious threat to any faith in Islam, and this has the imams threatening with violence anyone who makes such criticism in defense of their job security

Quote:Mohammed was no worse than Moses, having a barbarian as the major figure of your religion isn't a key problem.

No, these two characters were not the same!

It probably doesn't matter that one in your comparison for argument was real, while the other was fiction. However, Moses, as the story tells it, was no barbarian. He was highly educated, very smart, and hardly described as the sort who enjoyed the company of horse thieves, slave traders, and other brutes. He was also bad-tempered, megalomaniacally ambitious, and vindictive, but none of those traits ever made one a barbarian. He did not proudly beat his wives, nor did he teach others to do the same. 

The tale of Moses supported the culture of a people who believed they were insignificant to their world, as they struggled to rise above their slave origins (whether or not there's any truth on this, they believe it), and make something better of their culture. The tale of Mohammad glamorized the excesses of a culture which existed by stealing from others, selling them into slavery, and laying waste wherever they went after thousands of years of intense cattle grazing while shunning agriculture. Nothing similar here at all!

Quote:Iranian and Afghani women had their heads uncovered and their skirts up to their knees in the seventies. The West played a key role in changing that.

Well of course exposure to different cultures and new ways influence changes in people, what's your point with that? It also had a deleterious impact on religious support as well (particularly Islam in Afghanistan), which really pissed off Middle Eastern imams.

Moses commanded the slaughter of women and children, so ...

(December 8, 2015 at 9:21 pm)Irrational Wrote: Moses commanded the slaughter of women and children, so ...

Didn't say he wasn't war-like, he was every bit what the Jews who invented him were. So was any society at the time which would not be enslaved by others - in days where social ideas were far less developed and the consequences of failure were far more harsh, you would do unto others or they would do you. Again, you try and hijack the point, which is that one story was about a group raising their people from the ashes, while the other was about how good it is to be a man!

I must admit Obama is being a wimp with Isis after the California shootings!

If Bush was still president, he'd have invaded Australia by now!

(December 8, 2015 at 9:34 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote:

(December 8, 2015 at 9:21 pm)Irrational Wrote: Moses commanded the slaughter of women and children, so ...

Didn't say he wasn't war-like, he was every bit what the Jews who invented him were. So was any society at the time which would not be enslaved by others - in days where social ideas were far less developed and the consequences of failure were far more harsh, you would do unto others or they would do you. Again, you try and hijack the point, which is that one story was about a group raising their people from the ashes, while the other was about how good it is to be a man!

There are both good and bad regarding Mohammad. He wasn't what I would consider a decent person at all (I personally would not get along with either Moses or Mohammad), but his life wasn't just about him being "a man". An example of good deeds he did was to show respect and support for the less fortunate (poor, orphans, widows). He can also be seen as a hero who endured years of persecution but then prevailed over the persecutors.

You see Moses as a saint compared to Mohammad, but it really is all a matter of perspective.

(December 8, 2015 at 9:47 pm)Irrational Wrote:

(December 8, 2015 at 9:34 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: Didn't say he wasn't war-like, he was every bit what the Jews who invented him were. So was any society at the time which would not be enslaved by others - in days where social ideas were far less developed and the consequences of failure were far more harsh, you would do unto others or they would do you. Again, you try and hijack the point, which is that one story was about a group raising their people from the ashes, while the other was about how good it is to be a man!

There are both good and bad regarding Mohammad. He wasn't what I would consider a decent person at all (I personally would not get along with either Moses or Mohammad), but his life wasn't just about him being "a man". An example of good deeds he did was to show respect and support for the less fortunate (poor, orphans, widows). He can also be seen as a hero who endured years of persecution but then prevailed over the persecutors.

You see Moses as a saint compared to Mohammad, but it really is all a matter of perspective.

Or maybe I see the comparison between Mo and Mo as the differential influences which they have had on their respective cultures.

What matters is what each has become under the influence of their respective leaders, both good and bad - and it goes without saying that the stronger Islam becomes in the Middle East, the more they slide back toward Stone Age culture. But then I probably shouldn't denigrate Stone Age people, chances are their women were strong, and would kick you awake in the morning yelling "BITCH - GO HUNT ME UP SOME MEAT FOR MY STEW!!!"  Jews, on the other hand slide into an abyss of neurosis the more they pay attention to the Talmud. Can't say the same if they pay attention only to the Torah, not that I idolize Moses as you say.

In the biblical fairy tale even Aaron didn't believe Moses.  Why do people believe him now?

There's a ton of propaganda flying around with the objective of conditioning people to carry out Ann Coutler's call after 911 =
"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war.
Ann Coulter"

The country is ready to jump at the next terrorist attack.  Trump will lead the charge about the administration being soft on the terrorists and the talking heads will bleat about it 24/7.  Trump will win in a landslide.  We will have a full-fledged police State by January 31, 2017.  We might even get some spiffy uniforms and jobs as concentration camp guards.

Mechaghostman2 Wrote:I'll just say this: Nobody died over the movie The Life Of Brian by Monty Python. People did however die over a very cheap and poorly acted Innocence Of The Muslims film. As well, nobody has killed anybody over any movie being made against atheists like "God's Not Dead." You make a movie or you draw a cartoon that is satirizing any other religion or non-religion, and nobody is killed. You make a movie or draw a cartoon satirizing Islam, Muhammad, Muslims, etc., and people are killed.

It doesn't matter that the majority of Muslims don't want to kill you, because there are still a great many Muslims that do. The statement "not all Muslims" is fucking irrelevant, because there are enough Muslims who act in such a way to be a problem.

355 mass shootings so far this year. 0.56% of them carried out by Muslims, who are 0.9% of the populations. I think you're engaging in poor risk assessment.

I have learned something new today: that ordering the slaughter of women and children (and your own people) doesn't make you a barbarian. Who knew?