Replies

the banning of Siobhan for alleged "anti-semitism" pursuant to her post below

Are you sure about this? Post # 124 is still there. The comment hasn't even been pulled, nonetheless having the poster banned.

>>>There are few people more hell-bent on the destruction of Christians than the descendents of those who betrayed Jesus for satanic lies.

If you had read the thread to which she was responding, surely you understand that she is talking about Muslims. It's not my understanding that bashing of Islam (or Catholics, for that matter) is a bannable offense in the same way "anti-semitism" would be.

If that comment was posted on this thread, then clearly you are correct that it could only refer to Muslims, not Jews, since this thread is dealing with Muslim terrorism and not with Jews in any way. However, it's the second part that I don't get. Why would it be okay to say that Muslims betrayed Christ but not okay to say the same thing about Jews? Why is there a special code of PC speech regarding Jews, but not any other religious or ethnic group?

=== Why would it be okay to say that Muslims betrayed Christ but not okay to say the same thing about Jews?

I should think that only a Jew who first had accepted Christ then could betray him. Muslims do accept Jesus -- but only to a certain extent -- placing Mohammed first and foremost.

And, again, I think it's important to remember that Islam is a Christian heresy even though that relationship seems harder to fathom, I guess, than Christianity's being somehow a Jewish heresy of sorts.

"Why is there a special code of PC speech regarding Jews, but not any other religious or ethnic group?"

I'm sorry, but even to ask that question is anti-Semitic. Please refer to the fine print on your copy of the Constitution under Amendment One.

Maybe you'll even get a chance to read this before the post is deleted by the Administrator.