Philosophy Now Forum

bobevenson wrote:... And please, don't make me research the Quran to prove my point.

No please do.

bobevenson wrote:Give me some examples, and when was the last time you heard about groups of Christians terrorizing the world? ...

Well depends what you mean by 'the world' and 'Christian' but the USA and now Russia appear to be doing both and both think themselves Christians.

On the last occasion that the US invaded Iraq George W Bush publicly said that America was "doing god's work". My guess is that the proportion of Christians who agreed with him would roughly equate to the proportion of Muslims who support the objectives of the jihaidists. The main difference is that in the case of the Iraq invasion such an inflammatory statement was made by the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, who also happened to be an illiterate shithead gangster, instead of merely by an illiterate shithead gangster without the expensive suit.

Obvious Leo wrote:On the last occasion that the US invaded Iraq George W Bush publicly said that America was "doing god's work". My guess is that the proportion of Christians who agreed with him would roughly equate to the proportion of Muslims who support the objectives of the jihaidists. The main difference is that in the case of the Iraq invasion such an inflammatory statement was made by the leader of the most powerful nation in the world, who also happened to be an illiterate shithead gangster, instead of merely by an illiterate shithead gangster without the expensive suit.

His suits aren't that expensive.

Bob, your Dunning-Kruger effect is showing:
70,000 clerics issue fatwa against terrorism, 1 500 000 Muslims support it
American Muslim Organizations Condemn ISIS Terrorism
Muslims in America Condemn Extremists and Fear Anew for Their Lives
Muslim Leaders Have Roundly Denounced Islamic State

Do you know any Muslims?

bobevenson wrote:their lack of expressed outrage at the terrorists may indicate tacit support.

They see it on the whole, correctly, as rather state sponsored terrorism, and so are as confused as the rest of us to know what to think and do.

Pluto wrote:

bobevenson wrote:their lack of expressed outrage at the terrorists may indicate tacit support.

They see it on the whole, correctly, as rather state sponsored terrorism, and so are as confused as the rest of us to know what to think and do.

Islam is a violent religion that restricts free choice and treats women like property, and don't deny it because I can cite case after case, and so can anybody else.

Dude, religions aren't violent. It's people who are violent, none more so than some of those who have espoused Christianity.

mickthinks wrote:Dude, religions aren't violent. It's people who are violent, none more so than some of those who have espoused Christianity.

The Quran incites Muslim violence and represents the violent religion of Islam!

The Quran is sometimes interpreted in a way that incites violence in some Muslims prone to violence. It is interpreted in a way that promoted peace and love in the vast majority of Muslims. Much like the Bible.

Pluto wrote:

bobevenson wrote:their lack of expressed outrage at the terrorists may indicate tacit support.

They see it on the whole, correctly, as rather state sponsored terrorism, and so are as confused as the rest of us to know what to think and do.

In what way is jihadism correctly definable as state-sponsored terrorism?

bobevenson wrote:Islam is a violent religion that restricts free choice and treats women like property, and don't deny it because I can cite case after case, and so can anybody else.

Christianity is a professed loving religion that has acted violently, restricted free choice and treated women like property and the only reason why it doesn't now is because it's not in power.

mickthinks wrote:The Quran is sometimes interpreted in a way that incites violence in some Muslims prone to violence. It is interpreted in a way that promoted peace and love in the vast majority of Muslims. Much like the Bible.

Although there is a more serious problem with the Koran as if read in chronological order the clause that Mohammed put in that said the later sayings supersede the previous ones mean that it does tend to promote a violent approach.