Posted on 01/04/2003 1:25:16 AM PST by JohnHuang2
Ha! You're going to force me to crack open my history books (I know Charles Martel, and I liked Charleton Heston's rendition of el Cid - years ago; but can't say I know those other fellows).
Thanks, and have a blessed Sabbath.
In fact I recently posted to two articles right here on FR about mainstream muslim groups who took a stand against radical islam.
And just yesterday I posted 27 articles right here on FR proving that your articles were fabricated and pulled from known terrorist sites.
Blind hate is a ridiculous and close minded answer to this large and complex problem.
First of all it is not blind. It is justified by the endless stream of atrocities perpetrated by muslim savages worldwide, daily.
It is a rational and necessary response to primitive mindless Muslim Mass Murder savagery.
It may be complex in the tiny minds of the sand maggots but for civilized people it is simple: when life threatening vermin abound, exterminate them without a second thought.
No. You should be ashamed for sweeping generalities with no facts or cogent arguments, and asinine comparisons of Muslim Mass Murderers of today with Christians of the 11th century.
Try to get a clue, OK?
Okay, you bunch of arguers - just tell me this:
Name one "Muslim" country that is not a miserable, nighmarish place.
'nuff said.
He's still one of the few Christian voices given air time on TV to say anything of substance.
...I wonder how long it will take him to apologize for these statements.
Jorge 2
I didn't say what he should or shouldn't apologize for...even though you are desperately trying to pry an opinion out of me on this...I'll decide what questions I answer and when. In any case you really should learn to read posts before you respond to them.
Jorge, you're a dishonest fellow who embraces weasel words.
And you can save the sanctimony for somebody that cares. I'm a sinner no doubt. I use bad language and do not not suffer fools well at time's but hey, nobody's perfect.
You on the other hand lie whenever it suits your needs. And you have a terminal case of self importance.
All in all, I prefer my shortcomings.
There isn't even one that I can think of.
I don't think WE did. :-)
I have repeatedly stated that my position is that I DO NOT see any "moral equivalence" between the Bible and the Koran, between Christianity and Islam.
Perhaps you missed those posts.
Well said.
And many Muslim leaders and adherants say that the references from the Koran you cite are also quite specific and cover a very limited historical period.
I don't think its a waste of time to try and understand the open-ended Mohammedan command to 'kill and lie to the infidel'. Particularly since I'm an 'infidel'.
I never said it's a waste of time trying to understand this, but rather that arguing over the interpretation and context of passages from the Bible and Koran that some say advocate violence is for the most part simply a waste of time.
Most lay people of either religion are simply not going to delve into it that deep, let alone be convinced of your interpretations.
Especially when so many of their leaders already are not.
If there is some rationale that limits these verses to a particular time and place in Medina -- or there is a deeper spiritual meaning, I'd sure like to hear them. And therein lies the point on which we seem to be talking past each other.
Actually this is not the point I am arguing and I hope what I wrote above clarifies my position a little better.
You may or may not be theologically correct in your comparison of the Bible and the Koran.
But do you really think you are going to convince Muslims you know more about what the Koran teaches than they do?
And even if you could, will you convince them that the Koran teaches it is their duty to as Muslims to persecute and kill all non-Muslims in order to be true to their profession of faith?
Would you consider that a worthwhile objective?
Jorge 1
...I wonder how long it will take him to apologize for these statements.
Jorge 2
I didn't say what he should or shouldn't apologize for...even though you are desperately trying to pry an opinion out of me on this...I'll decide what questions I answer and when. In any case you really should learn to read posts before you respond to them.
Jorge, you're a dishonest fellow who embraces weasel words.
__________________________
Actually you're the REAL dishonest weasel for posting my original statement out of context in order to avoid admitting you started a stupid argument over something I never said.
I'm not going to repost my entire statement again because it is obvious you are not interested in the truth.
Nor responding to what I've actually posted....nearly as much as you are interested in assigning me a position you feel comfortable ranting against.
You on the other hand lie whenever it suits your needs.
Right. Your definition of a lie is anything you disagree with.
I could care less what you think about my views on Jerry Falwell or anything else.
The idea that I "need" to lie to you about anything is absurd.
I don't even care about proving any particular point to you. I respond to your posts for my personal amusement.
Chicago?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.