|
Post by thorshairspray on Nov 27, 2017 3:07:05 GMT
How is scale not important when assessing comparative threat? Thats like saying I should be just as cautious of a meteor hitting me as I am a car hitting me. And the disparity isn't arguable. Boko Haram killed around 6000 people in 2016 alone, that would be ten years worth of homicide in the UK, more than the EU for a year. How many Christian groups can you point to that are comparable? On what basis are you claiming that Christian terrorism is hidden? And yes, we need to address our issues, but if my car has a broken radio and a flat tyre, I know which I will fix first. Scale IS important when assessing comparative threat, but here is something else you added that was not in the conversation previously. Christian terrorism is underreported in the west, this is an obvious fact given how little people are aware of the reality of ongoing christian terrorism. If YOUR car has two issues broken, sure priortise them. But a better analogy would be calling out your neighbor as a person who does not take care of his car when his tyre is flat, meanwhile ignoring your broken window. Let me be clear, I am not at this point willing to go into a comparison of Muslim vs Christian terrorism, what I am saying is that Christian terrorism exists and pointing to Muslims engaging in more terrorism is not a valid way to mitigate that fact. The scale of the problems was the very first thing I said to you, to which you replied that scale wasn't important. Sorry, but that is just whataboutism. In the UK since 2010 there have been 9 terror attacks. 6 were Islamic and zero were Christian. In France since 2010 there have been 30 terror attacks. 28 were Islamist and zero were Christian. In Germany since 2010 there have 7 terror attacks. 6 were Islamist and zero were Christian. So the three biggest European powers have seen a total of 46 terror attacks in seven years, of which 40 were Islamic and none were christian. This is why your analogy is wrong. I am failing to see the case being made for the over hype of Islamic terror and the under reporting of Christian terror.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Nov 27, 2017 9:47:33 GMT
Point out the Christian terrorism, You can't can you? "muh crusades n liek teh KkK n stuff!!!11!!!" Written in a way that reflects the intelligence of Christian apologists? We don't have to go that far. Northern Ireland, Rwanda, Bosnia, Utoya... Cue the obligatory apologists: "But they weren't real Christians!" or "But this wasn't Christian terrorism!" Yeah right. EDIT: Gadreel expressed it better than I did.
|
|
madmikev40
Sophomore
@madmikev40
Posts: 914
Likes: 69
|
Post by madmikev40 on Nov 27, 2017 10:07:33 GMT
"muh crusades n liek teh KkK n stuff!!!11!!!" Written in a way that reflects the intelligence of Christian apologists? We don't have to go that far. Northern Ireland, Rwanda, Bosnia, Utoya... Cue the obligatory apologists: "But they weren't real Christians!" or "But this wasn't Christian terrorism!" Yeah right. EDIT: Gadreel expressed it better than I did. Wow people not following the teachings of christ so how can they be Christians?
|
|
|
Post by THawk on Nov 27, 2017 13:05:58 GMT
Well you are an enemy of religious freedom, that much is clear. People should be free not only to "believe" in thought what they want, but also to carry out their beliefs in society, as long as that doesn't directly physically harm other people. Conservatives, Muslims, Jews, Hindus etc everyone should be free to pray and carry whatever religious symbols they want to work and public places, and they should not be forced to provide their services for events that go against their beliefs, such as gay marriage. That is religious freedom, and you are against it. You want religious people shut down and banished from every single last aspect of society, and hope that their beliefs, and all of religion, eventually fade and disappear and go instinct. This is why the majority of straight secular gay marriage supporters don't actually give the slightest damn about gay marriage itself; their only real desire is to see religion dismantled. Wrong! It is about the endorsement of their bulls<>t beliefs. Religion has been a scourge on society and civilization since kingdom come, yet they want the freedom to continue to be ignorant fools regarding what they believe to be the word of God and the truth. Let them, and same sex couples can get married by a celebrant or some other church that will allow them. Not all will discriminate. ...and churches who want to do that should be perfectly free to offer such services, while others should be free not to provide them. That's religious freedom. But as so many replies to this thread serve as a testament to, many people have no interest whatsoever as what counts as discrimination or freedom; they just see it as a platform to spew ridiculous, absurd anti-religious bigotry. It is pure hatred they are speaking out of, and that is what is at the center of so many of these cases. No one in factuality gives the slightest, most meager damn that a gay couple has to walk across the street to get their cake instead; it's all about using every available avenue to demonize religious people and purge faith from every aspect of society. Hence, hatred of religion and hatred of religious freedom. Oh and as a historical lesson, religion has been the building block of human civilization and the building factor that has built up everything, for good or for bad. Without religion humankind would still be swinging from the trees into feces-infested cave orgies. Which, to be perfectly honest.....seems to be exact wish of so much of secular society.
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Nov 27, 2017 13:06:13 GMT
"muh crusades n liek teh KkK n stuff!!!11!!!" Written in a way that reflects the intelligence of Christian apologists? We don't have to go that far. Northern Ireland, Rwanda, Bosnia, Utoya... Cue the obligatory apologists: "But they weren't real Christians!" or "But this wasn't Christian terrorism!" Yeah right. EDIT: Gadreel expressed it better than I did. I already said Bosnia, the other are not Christian terror. Sorry to break it to you, but being a Muslim and committing a terrorist act, doesn't make it Islamic Terrorism. Nobody in Northern Ireland was blowing up anyone in the name of Jesus.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Nov 27, 2017 15:08:17 GMT
Wrong! It is about the endorsement of their bulls<>t beliefs. Religion has been a scourge on society and civilization since kingdom come, yet they want the freedom to continue to be ignorant fools regarding what they believe to be the word of God and the truth. Let them, and same sex couples can get married by a celebrant or some other church that will allow them. Not all will discriminate. ...and churches who want to do that should be perfectly free to offer such services, while others should be free not to provide them. That's religious freedom. But as so many replies to this thread serve as a testament to, many people have no interest whatsoever as what counts as discrimination or freedom; they just see it as a platform to spew ridiculous, absurd anti-religious bigotry. It is pure hatred they are speaking out of, and that is what is at the center of so many of these cases. No one in factuality gives the slightest, most meager damn that a gay couple has to walk across the street to get their cake instead; it's all about using every available avenue to demonize religious people and purge faith from every aspect of society. Hence, hatred of religion and hatred of religious freedom. Oh and as a historical lesson, religion has been the building block of human civilization and the building factor that has built up everything, for good or for bad. Without religion humankind would still be swinging from the trees into feces-infested cave orgies. Which, to be perfectly honest.....seems to be exact wish of so much of secular society. Yes, the building block of human civilization, built on the backs of captured non-believers (Egypt) or by human sacrifice (Aztecs), ad nauseam. Religion has been used to control large groups of the have-nots by the haves. Napoleon said that religion was a fine thing to keep the common people quiet, someone else quoted that religion was what kept the poor from murdering the rich. A fine legacy, religion.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Nov 27, 2017 16:07:01 GMT
...and churches who want to do that should be perfectly free to offer such services, while others should be free not to provide them. That's religious freedom. But as so many replies to this thread serve as a testament to, many people have no interest whatsoever as what counts as discrimination or freedom; they just see it as a platform to spew ridiculous, absurd anti-religious bigotry. It is pure hatred they are speaking out of, and that is what is at the center of so many of these cases. No one in factuality gives the slightest, most meager damn that a gay couple has to walk across the street to get their cake instead; it's all about using every available avenue to demonize religious people and purge faith from every aspect of society. Hence, hatred of religion and hatred of religious freedom. Oh and as a historical lesson, religion has been the building block of human civilization and the building factor that has built up everything, for good or for bad. Without religion humankind would still be swinging from the trees into feces-infested cave orgies. Which, to be perfectly honest.....seems to be exact wish of so much of secular society. Yes, the building block of human civilization, built on the backs of captured non-believers (Egypt) or by human sacrifice (Aztecs), ad nauseam. Religion has been used to control large groups of the have-nots by the haves. Napoleon said that religion was a fine thing to keep the common people quiet, someone else quoted that religion was what kept the poor from murdering the rich. A fine legacy, religion. You accuse religion of doing something that governments do.
I wish theophobiacs could come up with a coherent argument regarding how they are forced to do stuff just because their feelings are occasionally hurt by those who not doing the examples they provide.
As an aside, the poor shouldn't murder the rich. It's as wrong ad the rich murdering the poor.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Nov 27, 2017 17:28:21 GMT
Scale IS important when assessing comparative threat, but here is something else you added that was not in the conversation previously. Christian terrorism is underreported in the west, this is an obvious fact given how little people are aware of the reality of ongoing christian terrorism. If YOUR car has two issues broken, sure priortise them. But a better analogy would be calling out your neighbor as a person who does not take care of his car when his tyre is flat, meanwhile ignoring your broken window. Let me be clear, I am not at this point willing to go into a comparison of Muslim vs Christian terrorism, what I am saying is that Christian terrorism exists and pointing to Muslims engaging in more terrorism is not a valid way to mitigate that fact. The scale of the problems was the very first thing I said to you, to which you replied that scale wasn't important. Sorry, but that is just whataboutism. In the UK since 2010 there have been 9 terror attacks. 6 were Islamic and zero were Christian. In France since 2010 there have been 30 terror attacks. 28 were Islamist and zero were Christian. In Germany since 2010 there have 7 terror attacks. 6 were Islamist and zero were Christian. So the three biggest European powers have seen a total of 46 terror attacks in seven years, of which 40 were Islamic and none were christian. This is why your analogy is wrong. I am failing to see the case being made for the over hype of Islamic terror and the under reporting of Christian terror. I meant that comparative threat was new to the conversation. You are the one that has been bringing in the observation that muslims are more terrorist than Christian, my response was simply that there are Christian terrorists. The reporting is geographic, there are no reports of Christian terrorism in Africa for example. Like I say I am not going to play the comparison game, i was simply asked for Christian terrorism.
|
|
|
Post by tickingmask on Nov 27, 2017 19:57:22 GMT
Freedom of expression allows them to state it, but freedom of religion allows them to follow a religion that makes them say it. No, freedom or religion allows them to follow a religion. Period. Regardless whether it makes them say "gays are icky" or "gays are the most wonderful people in the universe". It's not so much you picking a poor example as you conflating two separate issues that really should not be conflated. Sure, there may well be a correlation between religion and homophobia, but correlation does not equal causation, and all that.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Nov 27, 2017 20:10:27 GMT
Freedom of expression allows them to state it, but freedom of religion allows them to follow a religion that makes them say it. No, freedom or religion allows them to follow a religion. Period. Regardless whether it makes them say "gays are icky" or "gays are the most wonderful people in the universe". It's not so much you picking a poor example as you conflating two separate issues that really should not be conflated. Sure, there may well be a correlation between religion and homophobia, but correlation does not equal causation, and all that. Ok so I admit that homophobia is a terrible example, it was simply an illustration that freedom of religion allows a follower of religion to hold their religious views. I do think though that there is a causation between religion and homophobia, it is not the only source, but when your religion teaches you that gays are bad then there is a pretty smoking gun for a causational link there.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Nov 27, 2017 20:29:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Nov 27, 2017 20:34:26 GMT
No, freedom or religion allows them to follow a religion. Period. Regardless whether it makes them say "gays are icky" or "gays are the most wonderful people in the universe". It's not so much you picking a poor example as you conflating two separate issues that really should not be conflated. Sure, there may well be a correlation between religion and homophobia, but correlation does not equal causation, and all that. Ok so I admit that homophobia is a terrible example, it was simply an illustration that freedom of religion allows a follower of religion to hold their religious views. I do think though that there is a causation between religion and homophobia, it is not the only source, but when your religion teaches you that gays are bad then there is a pretty smoking gun for a causational link there. heterosexuality teaches gay sex is icky far more than religion.
I know that's why I never want to have dude sex.
|
|
madmikev40
Sophomore
@madmikev40
Posts: 914
Likes: 69
|
Post by madmikev40 on Nov 27, 2017 20:35:35 GMT
You still crying about me kicking your arse on here? Truly pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Nov 27, 2017 20:36:33 GMT
tpfkar POW! You gutted me with that one. You still crying about me kicking your arse on here? Truly pathetic. You are a true master of the blade. And smart, too! not even remotely so in these parts
|
|
madmikev40
Sophomore
@madmikev40
Posts: 914
Likes: 69
|
Post by madmikev40 on Nov 27, 2017 20:39:04 GMT
If I wasn't right you wouldn't be crying still.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Nov 27, 2017 20:40:20 GMT
tpfkar You are a true master of the blade. And smart, too!
If I wasn't right you wouldn't be crying still. You do perfectly encapsulate the integrity of the Abrahamic. not even remotely so in these parts
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Nov 27, 2017 20:41:06 GMT
Ok so I admit that homophobia is a terrible example, it was simply an illustration that freedom of religion allows a follower of religion to hold their religious views. I do think though that there is a causation between religion and homophobia, it is not the only source, but when your religion teaches you that gays are bad then there is a pretty smoking gun for a causational link there. heterosexuality teaches gay sex is icky far more than religion.
I know that's why I never want to have dude sex.
I think you mean that you are not personally interested in having gay sex, but that does not make it icky that other men have it, unless you are watching.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Nov 27, 2017 20:42:04 GMT
Yeah I had my suspicions as well, but I think Mike might be just a garden variety idiot.
|
|
madmikev40
Sophomore
@madmikev40
Posts: 914
Likes: 69
|
Post by madmikev40 on Nov 27, 2017 20:43:35 GMT
Definitely not a Jew or religious. Fuck you antisemites are dumb.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Nov 27, 2017 20:46:35 GMT
|
|