PDA

View Full Version : Why are communists OK with Islam?



CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-08-2010, 04:52 PM
I've noticed that communist leaning people who attack Christianity, seem to have very little problem with Islam. Why is this?
It seems like a double standard, since they're supposed to disavow real religions in general as communists, yet it's the communist leaning people who say we should lay off Islam, give them a pass, let 'em do what they want. These seem folks will yet condemn a Manger display at Christmas.

Rockntractor
10-08-2010, 04:56 PM
They are all subsidiaries of Satan industries.

Gingersnap
10-08-2010, 04:57 PM
The enemy of your enemy is your friend. ;)

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 05:01 PM
I've noticed that communist leaning people, and militant Atheists, who attack Christianity, seem to have very little problem with Islam. Why is this?
It seems like a double standard, especially on the communists' part, since they're supposed to disavow religion in general, yet it's the communist leaning people who say we should lay off Islam, give them a pass, let 'em do what they want. These seem folks will yet condemn a Manger display at Christmas.

Thanks. :mad:

That's an absolutely fucking bullshit accusation to make of me.

I am an atheist, an anti-theist. I have no sympathy whatsoever for militant Islam. Neither does anyone else that I know, and they range from atheists to Christians to Hindus to Muslims and then and then.

Why the fuck would I, or they?

Out-fucking-standing. You have just posted what has to be one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen on CU.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-08-2010, 05:04 PM
Thanks. :mad:

That's an absolutely fucking bullshit accusation to make of me.

I am an atheist, an anti-theist. I have no sympathy whatsoever for militant Islam. Neither does anyone else that I know, and they range from atheists to Christians to Hindus to Muslims and then and then.

Why the fuck would I, or they?

Out-fucking-standing. You have just posted what has to be one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen on CU.

Militant atheists.
Not Atheists in general. I made special note of that in the title and post.
Not your every day Atheist, but instead the kind of person who has a fit over seeing a Christmas display.

Rockntractor
10-08-2010, 05:06 PM
Thanks. :mad:

That's an absolutely fucking bullshit accusation to make of me.

I am an atheist, an anti-theist. I have no sympathy whatsoever for militant Islam. Neither does anyone else that I know, and they range from atheists to Christians to Hindus to Muslims and then and then.

Why the fuck would I, or they?

Out-fucking-standing. You have just posted what has to be one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen on CU.

You are the odd duck in the flock!:D

Constitutionally Speaking
10-08-2010, 05:09 PM
I've noticed that communist leaning people, and militant Atheists, who attack Christianity, seem to have very little problem with Islam. Why is this?
It seems like a double standard, especially on the communists' part, since they're supposed to disavow religion in general, yet it's the communist leaning people who say we should lay off Islam, give them a pass, let 'em do what they want. These seem folks will yet condemn a Manger display at Christmas.


Because BOTH the leftists and the Islamists hate the United States. The left thinks that by siding with them, they can weaken us.

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 05:15 PM
Not your every day Atheist, but instead the kind of person who has a fit over seeing a Christmas display.

I am neither your every day atheist (whatever the fuck that is supposed to be), nor do I have a fit over seeing your Christmas displays.

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 05:16 PM
You are the odd duck in the flock!:D

And you're a pig. SFW? :p

CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-08-2010, 05:17 PM
Thanks. :mad:

That's an absolutely fucking bullshit accusation to make of me.

I am an atheist, an anti-theist. I have no sympathy whatsoever for militant Islam. Neither does anyone else that I know, and they range from atheists to Christians to Hindus to Muslims and then and then.

Why the fuck would I, or they?

Out-fucking-standing. You have just posted what has to be one of the dumbest posts I've ever seen on CU.


I am neither your every day atheist (whatever the fuck that is supposed to be), nor do I have a fit over seeing your Christmas displays.

Every day Athist = someone who just is an Atheist, doesn't believe in God, etc. Someone, for example, who is tolerant with other's beliefs unlike say someone like Wilbur.
Just someone who doesn't believe but doesn't try to push that non-belief on the rest of the public.

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 05:41 PM
doesn't try to push that non-belief on the rest of the public.

Hmmm. Sounds at least a bit to me as if you'd prefer not for it to be discussed at all.

I've consistently stated my anti-theist views on CU since 2003, admittedly with a few gaps in traffic in that timespan.

I admit I haven't always been polite in doing so, yet I have tried to be, and I still have some good friends of faith here at CU.

I don't think I would be considered as pushing my non-belief too harshly. Quite the opposite, in fact. I think I've been quite mild, over the years.

Maybe that's been a mistake on my part. Maybe I should be harsher, what do you think?

The overly- religious have been pushing their belief, quite harshly, on people of my non-belief (I prefer to call it disbelief) for centuries, after all.

Rockntractor
10-08-2010, 05:51 PM
Hmmm. Sounds at least a bit to me as if you'd prefer not for it to be discussed at all.

I've consistently stated my anti-theist views on CU since 2003, admittedly with a few gaps in traffic in that timespan.

I admit I haven't always been polite in doing so, yet I have tried to be, and I still have some good friends of faith here at CU.

I don't think I would be considered as pushing my non-belief too harshly. Quite the opposite, in fact. I think I've been quite mild, over the years.

Maybe that's been a mistake on my part. Maybe I should be harsher, what do you think?

The overly- religious have been pushing their belief, quite harshly, on people of my non-belief (I prefer to call it disbelief) for centuries, after all.

http://www.animalpicturegallery.net/animal-picture-baby-duck-taminsea-animalpicture.jpg

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 05:57 PM
http://www.animalpicturegallery.net/animal-picture-baby-duck-taminsea-animalpicture.jpg

I ran over one of these the other day. My rear-right tire (it's a very wide tire) did most of the damage.

I was heartbroken.

There wasn't enough of it left for dinner, even as duck pancake.

Rockntractor
10-08-2010, 06:02 PM
I ran over one of these the other day. My rear-right tire (it's a very wide tire) did most of the damage.

I was heartbroken.

There wasn't enough of it left for dinner, even as duck pancake.

Quack Spackle.:(

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 06:20 PM
Quack Spackle.:(

Yeah, there was a lot of engine noise, but that's probably what it sounded like... those were its last words.

Problem is, it's a brand new back tire, and the tread pattern is really deep.

I could probably have dug it out intact (well, in the tread pattern, obviously), and grilled it. It would have been visually interesting, but the thought of the road grit kind of put me off doing that. I have enough dental problems at the moment, after all.

Anyway, back to the point.

Can we get some agreement that atheists are hardly likely to favour Islam over any other religion, and in fact, since Islam is the most recently rabid of all the three major religions, atheists of all stripes are likelier to hold it in even greater contempt than the other two.

Gingersnap
10-08-2010, 06:32 PM
CIIM raised a valid question and one that was deliberately crafted to exclude people like Hamps.

I don't get irritated when someone starts a thread with "Violent Christians..." :rolleyes:

Let's get back to the question: Why do prominent, militant atheists and obviously atheist Communist supporters give Islam a pass?

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 06:41 PM
CIIM raised a valid question and one that was deliberately crafted to exclude people like Hamps.



I get it. He's a good kid. I'm just busting his balls, 'cos he raised the subject and it's Friday.



Let's get back to the question: Why do prominent, militant atheists and obviously atheist Communist supporters give Islam a pass?

I don't think atheists do, certainly not because of their atheism.

If they're communists and also atheists, they are doing it toward fulfilment of a political agenda, certainly not a faith/no-faith one.

You want a prime example of what I'm talking about? Listen to Hitchens, the arch anti-theist. You could not express contempt for Islam better than he does.

MrsSmith
10-08-2010, 06:49 PM
I get it. He's a good kid. I'm just busting his balls, 'cos he raised the subject and it's Friday.



I don't think atheists do, certainly not because of their atheism.

If they're communists and also atheists, they are doing it toward fulfilment of a political agenda, certainly not a faith/no-faith one.

You want a prime example of what I'm talking about? Listen to Hitchens, the arch anti-theist. You could not express contempt for Islam better than he does.


Caught does raise a good point, Hamps. You are obviously a very mellow atheist, and probably not at all alone in that. However, it's really not possible to read the comments after any "Islamists killed someone" article without running across multiple "homegrown fundies are scarier" postings. Seriously, Muslims slaughter dozens of people [b]daily,[/] but the really BIG news is that one whacko killed an abortionist...once in 8 or 10 years. In many peoples' minds, the very rare instance of a supposed-Christian violence is somehow equivalent...or worse...than the Muslim murder of hundreds, the abuse of their women, the rape and mutilation of their girls, even their practice of slavery. :confused:

CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-08-2010, 06:50 PM
I get it. He's a good kid. I'm just busting his balls, 'cos he raised the subject and it's Friday.



I don't think atheists do, certainly not because of their atheism.

If they're communists and also atheists, they are doing it toward fulfilment of a political agenda, certainly not a faith/no-faith one.

You want a prime example of what I'm talking about? Listen to Hitchens, the arch anti-theist. You could not express contempt for Islam better than he does.

Fair enough, with regard to the Hitchens point.
If you want to change the topic title to take the "Atheist" part out, I'll understand--I could see how it could offend some people. I do think the communist point is valid, and I just think it's an interesting social phenomenon--That the same people who have Grand Mals when they see a decorative Manger or the word "Christmas" are the same people who, for example, will defend the Ground Zero Mosque, or defend Islam. It's a strange thing, because you'd think as communists they'd dislike all religions equally, since all other religions go against their worship of the state.

Gingersnap
10-08-2010, 06:50 PM
You want a prime example of what I'm talking about? Listen to Hitchens, the arch anti-theist. You could not express contempt for Islam better than he does.

Absolutely, I've heard him speak about the Islamic threat more than once. He's kind of alone, though.

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 07:10 PM
He's kind of alone, though.

I don't think so. Dawkins hasn't anything good to say about Islam, either.

Wei Wu Wei
10-08-2010, 07:25 PM
What are you talking about? Some of the leaders of the New Atheism movement (what you appropriately call anti-theism) have been VERY outspoken about radical Islam and often point to Muslim extremists as "proof" that religion is a source of greater evil rather than greater good.

Sam Harris, a top New Atheist author has made this point in depth many times in his books.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-08-2010, 07:27 PM
Rah rah rah Religion is bad rah rah Goddamn America rah rah Socialism is great

Fixed

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 07:30 PM
Fair enough, with regard to the Hitchens point.
If you want to change the topic title to take the "Atheist" part out, I'll understand--I could see how it could offend some people. I do think the communist point is valid, and I just think it's an interesting social phenomenon--That the same people who have Grand Mals when they see a decorative Manger or the word "Christmas" are the same people who, for example, will defend the Ground Zero Mosque, or defend Islam. It's a strange thing, because you'd think as communists they'd dislike all religions equally, since all other religions go against their worship of the state.

Don't worry, I'm not offended, and were I to be, it wouldn't really matter, for we have a low tolerance for people's hurt feelings here on CU.

I don't want to change your thread title... it represents your opinion, in your words, and we do not like to change any CUer's words. Any member's opinion has the right to be heard, especially when that opinion deserves debate and mockery.

If you want us to change the title because you think you made it in error, that's fine, let us know.

Wei Wu Wei
10-08-2010, 07:30 PM
I wouldn't consider myself a New Atheist or Anti-Theist at all. sometimes i even consider myself a christian, but i believe that faith is more than a set of beliefs, but an action, and when i'm not doing it, I can' t claim to have it.

I often make references to a "God" but it's not really the onto-theological God of mainstream religious discussion.

I do know actual people who describe themselves as socialists, communists, maoists, ect. Most of them are Atheist but have no problems with religion and think that people like Sam Harris and other Anti-Theist are nothing more than shit-flingers.

Not al of them are atheist however, some are christians of various denominations and some are Muslims.

I don't see how you lump "communist" along with "militant atheist".

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 07:35 PM
blah.


Je später der Abend, desto interessanter die Gäste. NOT. :rolleyes:

You're three timezones behind your own ass. I think he's got the point.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-08-2010, 07:35 PM
Don't worry, I'm not offended, and were I to be, it wouldn't really matter, for we have a low tolerance for people's hurt feelings here on CU.

I don't want to change your thread title... it represents your opinion, in your words, and we do not like to change any CUer's words. Any member's opinion has the right to be heard, especially when that opinion deserves debate and mockery.

If you want us to change the title because you think you made it in error, that's fine, let us know.

Yes, I'd like if you changed it--Just for the other Atheist members here so they don't get the wrong impression.
Thanks =]

Gingersnap
10-08-2010, 07:41 PM
I don't see how you lump "communist" along with "militant atheist".

Communists in a political sense are by definition atheists.

Wei Wu Wei
10-08-2010, 07:42 PM
I may be wrong, but I have a feeling he's using that term a little loosely.

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 07:49 PM
Caught does raise a good point, Hamps. You are obviously a very mellow atheist, and probably not at all alone in that. However, it's really not possible to read the comments after any "Islamists killed someone" article without running across multiple "homegrown fundies are scarier" postings. Seriously, Muslims slaughter dozens of people [b]daily,[/] but the really BIG news is that one whacko killed an abortionist...once in 8 or 10 years. In many peoples' minds, the very rare instance of a supposed-Christian violence is somehow equivalent...or worse...than the Muslim murder of hundreds, the abuse of their women, the rape and mutilation of their girls, even their practice of slavery. :confused:

Nice of you to say, but I am certainly not a mellow atheist. I've just become polite(r).

What has caused this miracle?

I've learned over the years that there is no point at all in me trying to knock your faith, any more than there is point in you trying to knock my lack of faith. One-on-one, neither of us will defeat the other. And I in no way would seek to ban religion or religious observance. That would indeed be an exercise in futility.

That, and I prefer to get along with people of faith and no-faith.

I think what you describe in the rest of your post is far more symptomatic of the worst kind of far-leftist sentiment rather than anything that could be described as hard-atheism.

In some ways, I think agnostics (like WeeWee, who this evening can't seem to make his mind up if he's an atheist or a Christian) are worse than either your sort or mine.

At least you and I have made our minds up on the matter.

BadCat
10-08-2010, 07:50 PM
I wouldn't consider myself a New Atheist or Anti-Theist at all. sometimes i even consider myself a christian, but i believe that faith is more than a set of beliefs, but an action, and when i'm not doing it, I can' t claim to have it.

I often make references to a "God" but it's not really the onto-theological God of mainstream religious discussion.

I do know actual people who describe themselves as socialists, communists, maoists, ect. Most of them are Atheist but have no problems with religion and think that people like Sam Harris and other Anti-Theist are nothing more than shit-flingers.

Not al of them are atheist however, some are christians of various denominations and some are Muslims.

I don't see how you lump "communist" along with "militant atheist".

Translation: I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK I THINK

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 07:57 PM
Yes, I'd like if you changed it--Just for the other Atheist members here so they don't get the wrong impression.
Thanks =]

Changed accordingly.

MrsSmith
10-08-2010, 08:04 PM
Nice of you to say, but I am certainly not a mellow atheist. I've just become polite(r).

What has caused this miracle?

I've learned over the years that there is no point at all in me trying to knock your faith, any more than there is point in you trying to knock my lack of faith. One-on-one, neither of us will defeat the other. And I in no way would seek to ban religion or religious observance. That would indeed be an exercise in futility.

That, and I prefer to get along with people of faith and no-faith.

I think what you describe in the rest of your post is far more symptomatic of the worst kind of far-leftist sentiment rather than anything that could be described as hard-atheism. So, it's the political philosophy instead of the (anti-) religion philosophy...could well be.


In some ways, I think agnostics (like WeeWee, who this evening can't seem to make his mind up if he's an atheist or a Christian) are worse than either your sort or mine.

At least you and I have made our minds up on the matter.

No one likes fence-sitters... :D

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 08:38 PM
Communists in a political sense are by definition atheists.

Debatable. There are aspects of the sole surviving hard-Stalinist state that have striking resemblance to the worst kinds of theocracy. North Korea is only one deity short of a trinity.

They have the father and the son. Hopefully soon, they'll have a holy ghost.

Gingersnap
10-08-2010, 08:56 PM
Debatable. There are aspects of the sole surviving hard-Stalinist state that have striking resemblance to the worst kinds of theocracy. North Korea is only one deity short of a trinity.

They have the father and the son. Hopefully soon, they'll have a holy ghost.

That may be true but it's a very Western take on the political dynamic. I seriously doubt that the true believers in North Korea have any intention at all of duplicating a Western Christian hegemony. The form may be similar but the goals and objectives certainly are not.

Rockntractor
10-08-2010, 08:59 PM
That may be true but it's a very Western take on the political dynamic. I seriously doubt that the true believers in North Korea have any intention at all of duplicating a Western Christian hegemony. The form may be similar but the goals and objectives certainly are not.

Hampstershire is upset, he doesn't fit the mold!

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 09:34 PM
That may be true but it's a very Western take on the political dynamic. I seriously doubt that the true believers in North Korea have any intention at all of duplicating a Western Christian hegemony. The form may be similar but the goals and objectives certainly are not.

Possibly. All the myths of godhead and divine birth are readily apparent in North Korea, as is the state's insistence on glorification and worship of its Dear Leader and his late father, the eternal president, whatever the goals and objectives of the religion are.

hampshirebrit
10-08-2010, 09:37 PM
Hampstershire is upset, he doesn't fit the mold!

That'll do, piggie, that'll do. :D

Everything's cool. I'm off to bed, anyway.

Gingersnap
10-08-2010, 09:49 PM
Possibly. All the myths of godhead and divine birth are readily apparent in North Korea, as is the state's insistence on glorification and worship of its Dear Leader and his late father, the eternal president, whatever the goals and objectives of the religion are.

For the record, I know of no Christian group with more than family members that is interested in a theocracy. Unlike Muslims, we have too much theological diversity for that.

MrsSmith
10-09-2010, 09:18 AM
For the record, I know of no Christian group with more than family members that is interested in a theocracy. Unlike Muslims, we have too much theological diversity for that.If Christians had any intention of creating a theocracy, we'd have had it written into the Constitution, given the overwhelming percentage of Christians at our founding. The only groups that may create a "theocracy" these days are all leftist...greenies or PETA-types. The scary thing is that our president really seems to believe that he can single-handedly force the US into a green-energy theocracy, and is quite willing to do so without regard for the certain economic destruction of the country.

m00
10-09-2010, 09:47 AM
Translation: I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK I THINK

:D That's funny.

m00
10-09-2010, 09:48 AM
If Christians had any intention of creating a theocracy, we'd have had it written into the Constitution, given the overwhelming percentage of Christians at our founding. The only groups that may create a "theocracy" these days are all leftist...greenies or PETA-types. The scary thing is that our president really seems to believe that he can single-handedly force the US into a green-energy theocracy, and is quite willing to do so without regard for the certain economic destruction of the country.

How about christian conservatives passing morality laws?

Sonnabend
10-09-2010, 09:54 AM
I get it. He's a good kid. I'm just busting his balls,

Oh yay. I get a vacation :D:D:D

swirling_vortex
10-09-2010, 02:16 PM
Communists in a political sense are by definition atheists.
I don't think it's fair simply call them atheists because a communist and a libertarian atheist see religion in two different ways. The libertarian will simply leave things alone whereas the communist will use his own mortal deity (the state) to banish all forms of religion.

Rockntractor
10-09-2010, 02:37 PM
Oh yay. I get a vacation :D:D:D

http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/kangaroo-1.jpg?t=1286649391

hampshirebrit
10-09-2010, 05:09 PM
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/kangaroo-1.jpg?t=1286649391

This roo is signalling left, not right. You have the wrong pic for Sonna.

Odysseus
10-09-2010, 10:05 PM
I am neither your every day atheist (whatever the fuck that is supposed to be), nor do I have a fit over seeing your Christmas displays.
That's why you aren't an every day atheist. Wilbur would have a fit over a Christmas display. He's also got the dhimmi thing down pat, which you don't.

I do know actual people who describe themselves as socialists, communists, maoists, ect. Most of them are Atheist but have no problems with religion and think that people like Sam Harris and other Anti-Theist are nothing more than shit-flingers.

Not al of them are atheist however, some are christians of various denominations and some are Muslims.

I don't see how you lump "communist" along with "militant atheist".
Because communists tend to be among the most militant anti-Christians and anti-Semites. And among communists, there is a great deal of pro-Islamist sentiment because they buy into the anti-colonial/imperialist drivel that automatically assumes that any anti-American/anti-Israeli/anti-European movement is somehow an "authentic" expression of the same hatred that they hold for their nations and neighbors. It isn't, though. The Islamists loathe the folks at International ANSWER as much as they do the Heritage Foundation. They just find them useful for undermining the defenses of the west. Just because they are going to kill you last doesn't mean that they like you.

stsinner
10-09-2010, 10:15 PM
You are the odd duck in the flock!:D

Second.

MrsSmith
10-09-2010, 11:04 PM
How about christian conservatives passing morality laws?

How many morality laws are Christians trying to pass?

How many morality laws are Christians trying to protect?

How old are most of those laws? Decades? Centuries?

Calypso Jones
10-10-2010, 10:18 AM
they hate America so much that they would willingly die by jihad to see it destroyed.

m00
10-10-2010, 06:32 PM
How many morality laws are Christians trying to pass?

How many morality laws are Christians trying to protect?

How old are most of those laws? Decades? Centuries?

One thing I've noticed about Christian politicians (whether or not they are actually Christian, or just call themselves Christian, I don't know) is that they love to tell consenting adults what they can and can't do with their own bodies on private property. Anti-drug laws, anti-porn laws, anti-prostitution laws. These are morality laws. Hell, craigslist just pulled their "adult services" listing this month or something, under government pressure. Don't tell me that was the liberals. :p

CueSi
10-10-2010, 06:40 PM
One thing I've noticed about Christian politicians (whether or not they are actually Christian, or just call themselves Christian, I don't know) is that they love to tell consenting adults what they can and can't do with their own bodies on private property. Anti-drug laws, anti-porn laws, anti-prostitution laws. These are morality laws. Hell, craigslist just pulled their "adult services" listing this month or something, under government pressure. Don't tell me that was the liberals. :p

Actually, it partially was. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703743504575493961741178270.html): p It's the nature of government. And there was that one shining moment in the 1980's where the Moral Majority and NOW were on the same page. . . over porn.

~QC

Odysseus
10-10-2010, 07:41 PM
they hate America so much that they would willingly die by jihad to see it destroyed.

No, they think that the jihad will never get here. They believe that a defeat in Iraq or Afghanistan, like our defeat in Vietnam, will not impact their lives. They'll still go to the same parties, pursue the same empty lives and look down their noses at the rest of us. In fact, losing a war discredits their domestic opponents, and makes it easier to show us disdain.


Actually, it partially was. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703743504575493961741178270.html): p It's the nature of government. And there was that one shining moment in the 1980's where the Moral Majority and NOW were on the same page. . . over porn.

~QC

Exactly.

Social Conservatives try to regulate morality where they see people victimizing other people. They see porn as creating a culture of exploitation that increases sexual crimes. They see abortion as the murder of infants, drugs as horrifically addictive and destructive to whole communities, prostitution as modern slavery and exploitation of vulnerable women. Agree or disagree with these sentiments, but their philosophical position is that there is a victim, and they acknowledge that there is such a thing as private property. Liberals, OTOH, are perfectly happy to tell you what you can do with your body, even if there is no victim. One can argue about the merits of keeping drugs illegal, but trans-fats? It can conceivably be argued that someone under the influence of crack or meth poses a danger to others, but unless a trans-fat addict happens to be taking up the armrest next to you on an airline seat, he's really not hurting anyone but himself. The same goes for tobacco, which is no worse for you than marijuana, and doesn't impair motor skills, but guess which one a liberal will look down their nose at you for indulging.

I can generally count on a religious conservative to leave me alone if I'm not bothering him, because his philosophy accepts that there is no perfection until the next world. Liberals never leave us alone, because they are demanding perfection in this world.

MrsSmith
10-10-2010, 09:32 PM
One thing I've noticed about Christian politicians (whether or not they are actually Christian, or just call themselves Christian, I don't know) is that they love to tell consenting adults what they can and can't do with their own bodies on private property. Anti-drug laws, anti-porn laws, anti-prostitution laws. These are morality laws. Hell, craigslist just pulled their "adult services" listing this month or something, under government pressure. Don't tell me that was the liberals. :p

Let's see, most anti-porn and prostitution laws are what, a century old? And were originally written, why? Oh, yeah, because prostitution spreads disease and damages families. Porn? Hmmm, when was the last time your 10 year old ran across porn by accident? It's become WAY easier lately. My kid was searching for birds for her school homework...sparrow, quail, swallow... OMG!!!! She was totally upset. But I'm sure that has TONS to do with what adults do in private. OR gee, could it be that adults aren't at all good about staying on that private property??

How about that craigslist thing. Why was it pulled? Oh, yeah, I remember, somebody was whoring out children. :mad:

As for drugs, hey, you know, you want them sitting in your yard to shoot up...and stealing cash from you for their next hit, cooking meth and then selling you that house...you go right ahead and try to make it legal where you live. I'd rather not have it here.

CueSi
10-10-2010, 09:44 PM
Actually, Caught... the answer to your originating question is simple : the enemy of my enemy is my friend (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_enemy_of_my_enemy_is_my_friend). It's why Arabs sided with the Nazis...that concept was partially birthed by the Arabs and is a natural fit for the faithless, avaricious with a pious face nature of communism.

~QC

m00
10-10-2010, 11:43 PM
Let's see, most anti-porn and prostitution laws are what, a century old?

Not the ones dealing with the Internet, certainly.


And were originally written, why? Oh, yeah, because prostitution spreads disease and damages families. Porn? Hmmm, when was the last time your 10 year old ran across porn by accident? It's become WAY easier lately. My kid was searching for birds for her school homework...sparrow, quail, swallow... OMG!!!! She was totally upset. But I'm sure that has TONS to do with what adults do in private. OR gee, could it be that adults aren't at all good about staying on that private property??

Was google safe search on? Was the 10 year old supervised? 10 year olds do not have a "right" to use the Internet. It is, like the world, an adult place by default. That a child can wander around unsupervised in an adult world is not an argument to curtail the freedoms of adults. It's an argument that children should be supervised.


How about that craigslist thing. Why was it pulled? Oh, yeah, I remember, somebody was whoring out children. :mad:

"Think of the children" is always the convenient pretext. Hell, I'm sure someone exploited children using phones. I know, tap all phones! It's always the same with morality laws.


As for drugs, hey, you know, you want them sitting in your yard to shoot up...and stealing cash from you for their next hit, cooking meth and then selling you that house...you go right ahead and try to make it legal where you live. I'd rather not have it here.

Again, that freedoms can be abused is the nature of having freedoms. Some people want to remove our freedoms and enforce their version of morality, to make us "safe." I think that's nonsense. I believe it's the job of every individual to ensure their own safety, and the job of government to ensure that their freedoms are protected from government itself. But I guess, this is why I'm not a conservative. Clearly, if I believed in a nanny government, I would be. :D

noonwitch
10-11-2010, 08:35 AM
I think a lot of the reason libs and some feminists give a pass to Islam is political correctness, not necessarily because both hate America. They think they will be seen as racist if they criticize Islam.


I stand by my "mistrust Islam, love my muslim neighbors" statements.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
10-11-2010, 08:59 AM
I think a lot of the reason libs and some feminists give a pass to Islam is political correctness, not necessarily because both hate America. They think they will be seen as racist if they criticize Islam.


I stand by my "mistrust Islam, love my muslim neighbors" statements.

I agree with you again. I grew up with Muslims, none of them were ever mean to me. I have Muslim friends and they're good people. I want to do my best to prevent them from falling it with the wrong kind of Muslims, but I do that for all my friends..

wilbur
10-11-2010, 09:11 AM
Every day Athist = someone who just is an Atheist, doesn't believe in God, etc. Someone, for example, who is tolerant with other's beliefs unlike say someone like Wilbur.
Just someone who doesn't believe but doesn't try to push that non-belief on the rest of the public.

Yea, except I sure as hell am not OK with Islam.... and neither is any "militant" atheist that I know or read.

The sort of new wave of popular atheism came about because of 9/11 for goodness sake.... in response to the terrorist attacks.

You'll get no argument from me that PC left wingers and some academics have been far too accommodating to Islam, or have been quick to dismiss Islam as a major causal factor in terrorist activities. But it aint the "militant atheists" making these stands.

Yea, I think you will find that most of the new atheists are very liberal. But not all liberals are new atheists.

It seems like you are confusing the two.

wilbur
10-11-2010, 09:16 AM
That's why you aren't an every day atheist. Wilbur would have a fit over a Christmas display. He's also got the dhimmi thing down pat, which you don't.


I would have a fit over a Christmas display? That would be news to me.

I'm so laid back actually, I don't care who puts up a winters holiday display... Christian, atheist, jew, white supremacist, etc.

What will give me a fit is, if one group gets special treatment...

wilbur
10-11-2010, 09:24 AM
For the record, I know of no Christian group with more than family members that is interested in a theocracy. Unlike Muslims, we have too much theological diversity for that.

When a powerful group enters into the public sphere and starts implementing laws and policies that are based little else but their theology, we basically have a theocracy on our hands, no matter how much it pays lip service to "separation of church and state". And I see Christians working in this way all the time.

Christian abortion prohibitionists are a perfect example of this sort of 'invisible theocratic movement'.... since they are working to enact laws that are based almost entirely on theology, for which there is little-to-no secular justification.

m00
10-11-2010, 11:29 AM
Christian abortion prohibitionists are a perfect example of this sort of 'invisible theocratic movement'.... since they are working to enact laws that are based almost entirely on theology, for which there is little-to-no secular justification.

This is interesting. On one grounds should murder (adult-on-adult) should be illegal?

Odysseus
10-11-2010, 11:34 AM
Yea, except I sure as hell am not OK with Islam.... and neither is any "militant" atheist that I know or read.

The sort of new wave of popular atheism came about because of 9/11 for goodness sake.... in response to the terrorist attacks.

You'll get no argument from me that PC left wingers and some academics have been far too accommodating to Islam, or have been quick to dismiss Islam as a major causal factor in terrorist activities. But it aint the "militant atheists" making these stands.

Yea, I think you will find that most of the new atheists are very liberal. But not all liberals are new atheists.

It seems like you are confusing the two.

It's understandable, since "New Atheism" has only been around as a movement since 2006. The basic tenet, according to CNN: "What the New Atheists share is a belief that religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises." So, the New Atheist reaction to 9/11 is to lump all religious belief into one virulent stew of superstition, and ignore any differences between them. The Judeo-Christian tradition, which gave us the Renaissance, the Enlightenment and the modern era is no different from Islam, which has given us 1300 years of violence, hatred and darkness. It's just another moral equivalence game for leftists to play.


I would have a fit over a Christmas display? That would be news to me.

I'm so laid back actually, I don't care who puts up a winters holiday display... Christian, atheist, jew, white supremacist, etc.

What will give me a fit is, if one group gets special treatment...
Like being allowed to build a mosque at Ground Zero when a church that was there for decades isn't being allowed to rebuild? Haven't seen your fit on that. In fact, New Atheists are no less hostile to religious displays than old atheists, or middle-aged atheists. The 75-year-old, WWI Mojave War Memorial Cross is a perfect example:

http://leviticus1919.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/mojave_cross.jpg

You can't see the cross because it's been boarded over by the parks department. Apparently, it was too much for one atheist employee, who couldn't stand the sight of it. His reaction was so vehement that it makes me wonder how he'd take to garlic and holy water.


Mojave Desert Memorial Cross Stolen After Supreme Court Ruling in Favor
By Tara Lynn Thompson

The Supreme Court ruled to protect the Mojave Desert Memorial Cross from an ACLU lawsuit demanding it’s removal. On Sunday night, thieves with bolt cutters took it down anyway.

The 7-foot-tall, 75-year-old cross was first placed on the rock at the Mojave National Preserve in 1934 by the Veterans of Foreign Wars as a memorial to honor the American soldiers who died in World War I.

In April, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the lower courts ruling in California on the ACLU lawsuit which ordered the US Park Service to remove the cross due to separation of church and state.

However, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said the first amendment does not call for a total ban on symbols of faith but a middle-ground “policy of accommodation”, the LA Times reported. The Christian cross on government land was allowed to stand since the Constitution “does not require the eradication of all religious symbols in the public realm,” the US Supreme Court ruled.

On Sunday night, two weeks after the ruling, the cross was removed.


“This is an outrage, akin to desecrating people’s graves,” said Kelly Shackelford, president of the Liberty Institute, which represents the caretakers of the Mojave Desert War Memorial. “It’s a disgraceful attack on the selfless sacrifice of our veterans. We will not rest until this memorial is re-installed.”

Authorities are saying the motive could have been thieves wanting scrap metal or people involved in the case. Or better said, people who disagreed with the ruling. The latter seems more likely since scrap metal thieves have somehow been able to keep their hands off the cross for 75-years.


“The American Legion expects whoever is responsible for this vile act to be brought to justice,” said Clarence Hill, the group’s national commander. “While the memorial has been attacked, the fight will continue to ensure that veterans memorials will remain sacrosanct.”

The Liberty Institute is offering a $25,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction in the theft case

http://www.thoughtsfromaconservativemom.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/aclu.jpg

Wei Wu Wei
10-11-2010, 11:36 AM
I think a lot of the reason libs and some feminists give a pass to Islam is political correctness, not necessarily because both hate America. They think they will be seen as racist if they criticize Islam.


I stand by my "mistrust Islam, love my muslim neighbors" statements.

Honestly, I don't know that much about Islam to criticize it. For the most part, I'm less concerned with Islam in other parts of the world than I am with Islam in America.

There's no such thing as one Islam, there's a billion and a half Muslims in the world so I expect various interpretations of the faith.

I'm more concerned with Islam in America and in my experience it has relatively little impact and the Muslims I've known in person have all been good respectable people.


As for Christianity, well there's FAR more christians in this nation, so naturally there's more versions of it, and yes there's more chances of nutjobs twisting the faith to match their own crazy ideas (like westboro baptist).


Being that I grew up in a christian environment and know far more about it than Islam, I'm willing ot tlak about it plenty, but by no means do I want christianity to not exist or do I have any problems with Christianity.


I find certain practices that are apparently performed in other places appalling, but I do not attribute that as a blanket description to all people who follow that religion.


Long story short, I don't have a problem with Christianity and I know far far more about it than Islam and I am able to criticize certain aspects of Christian culture or people who claim to be Christians. As for Islam, I don't know enough to take any firm positions. I'm still learning a lot.

Odysseus
10-11-2010, 03:20 PM
Honestly, I don't know that much about Islam to criticize it. For the most part, I'm less concerned with Islam in other parts of the world than I am with Islam in America.

There's no such thing as one Islam, there's a billion and a half Muslims in the world so I expect various interpretations of the faith.

I'm more concerned with Islam in America and in my experience it has relatively little impact and the Muslims I've known in person have all been good respectable people.


As for Christianity, well there's FAR more christians in this nation, so naturally there's more versions of it, and yes there's more chances of nutjobs twisting the faith to match their own crazy ideas (like westboro baptist).


Being that I grew up in a christian environment and know far more about it than Islam, I'm willing ot tlak about it plenty, but by no means do I want christianity to not exist or do I have any problems with Christianity.


I find certain practices that are apparently performed in other places appalling, but I do not attribute that as a blanket description to all people who follow that religion.


Long story short, I don't have a problem with Christianity and I know far far more about it than Islam and I am able to criticize certain aspects of Christian culture or people who claim to be Christians. As for Islam, I don't know enough to take any firm positions. I'm still learning a lot.

What mendacity! You don't know enough about Islam to criticize it, but whenever those of us who have studied it point out the inherent dangers in it, you deride us as racists. What this tells us is that you are admitting that you are attacking those who attack Islam, not out of knowledge of the threat, but out of ignorance of it, something that I've been saying since your first post. Why would you insist on defending a movement that you claim to know little about, even though its adherents have killed thousands of Americans? Wouldn't that fact alone make you the least bit skeptical about the intentions of the Islamists?

In one very dishonest post, you've made the point of this thread. Well done, Wei.

Articulate_Ape
10-11-2010, 03:55 PM
What mendacity! You don't know enough about Islam to criticize it, but whenever those of us who have studied it point out the inherent dangers in it, you deride us as racists. What this tells us is that you are admitting that you are attacking those who attack Islam, not out of knowledge of the threat, but out of ignorance of it, something that I've been saying since your first post. Why would you insist on defending a movement that you claim to know little about, even though its adherents have killed thousands of Americans? Wouldn't that fact alone make you the least bit skeptical about the intentions of the Islamists?

In one very dishonest post, you've made the point of this thread. Well done, Wei.


Game, set, match.

hampshirebrit
10-11-2010, 04:25 PM
What mendacity! ... you deride us as racists.
In one very dishonest post, you've made the point of this thread. Well done, Wei.

A good point.

Wee Wee, if first you attack those of us who dislike Islam and call us racists, you then confuse religion with race.

That is a mistake that those close, in terms of belief and ancestry to the geographical origins of Islam, do not make. Many Arabs hold that those living in the sub-saharan regions of Africa should be considered as being unworthy to hold the faith.

One need look no further than the Darfur conflict to find evidence of this. People tend to assume this is a Muslim vs non Muslim conflict, whereas the sorry truth is that it's an Arab vs black war, with as many black Muslims becoming the victims as black Christians and black Animists.

Wei Wu Wei
10-11-2010, 05:02 PM
What mendacity! You don't know enough about Islam to criticize it, but whenever those of us who have studied it point out the inherent dangers in it, you deride us as racists. What this tells us is that you are admitting that you are attacking those who attack Islam, not out of knowledge of the threat, but out of ignorance of it, something that I've been saying since your first post. Why would you insist on defending a movement that you claim to know little about, even though its adherents have killed thousands of Americans? Wouldn't that fact alone make you the least bit skeptical about the intentions of the Islamists?

In one very dishonest post, you've made the point of this thread. Well done, Wei.

Well I don't know enough about it to make any definitive statements about it, but I talk to my muslims friends about it and they seem to disagree with you. Frankly, I trust practicing Muslims that I know personally to be good people over someone who may or may not know what they are talking about.

From what I've seen and heard from actual Muslims, there doesn't seem to be any hypoerbolic threat inherent to Islam, but no I am no scholar of Islam myself.