RE: Jihad v. Crusades
February 25, 2015 at 9:20 pm
(This post was last modified: February 25, 2015 at 9:23 pm by mralstoner.)
(February 25, 2015 at 9:10 pm)Cato Wrote: If you think the Crusades were defensive in nature you have a very poor grasp of geography and history; essentially, you're on dumb mother fucker.I don't agree, but let's assume that you're right that the Crusades were not defensive.
There is still the first point that Christian doctrine has nothing remotely like the sanctioning of violence that Islam does.
We're comparing religious doctrine, and the subsequent behavioural patterns of its followers, not just the individual historical actions of people who may or may not be accurate representations of their doctrine.
The Islamic holy books contain hundreds of calls to violence. Mohammed spent 13 years head-chopping and sex enslaving.
Compare that with Jesus and the New Testament. There is NO COMPARISON.
Mohammed was a barbaric role model. Jesus was a hippy who overturned tables.
Trying to compare Islam and Christianity is intellectually juvenile. Read the biographies of Jesus and Mohammed to a 5th grader and even they can see that one is a far more violent role model than the other.
The burning question is: why do so many atheists want to make all religions equally violent?
You'd need a psychologist to answer that. My guess is you're all intellectually lazy and just want to hate all religions because it's intellectually easy.
That's not rationality, that's lazy hate.
