Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Is Islam Evil?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>
Author
brihard View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Making stuff up

Joined: 05 September 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 10156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote brihard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 September 2006 at 4:49pm
Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

  How can I use God's word to prove what Christ has taught us through the Holy spirit if those whom I speak to have no faith in Jesus?

Here is that presumption again.



What are you saying I am presuming?


Circular logic is fun!
"Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation."

-FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011.

Yup, he actually said that.
Back to Top
Tolgak View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Master of MSPaint and bri's Daddy

Joined: 12 July 2002
Location: BEHIND YOU!
Status: Offline
Points: 1239481
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tolgak Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 September 2006 at 4:49pm
Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

  How can I use God's word to prove what Christ has taught us through the Holy spirit if those whom I speak to have no faith in Jesus?

Here is that presumption again.



What are you saying I am presuming?


That:

A) God's word was indeed said by god and not invented by people.
B) God's (possibly some storyteller's) word is true because you have faith in it.
C) Supposedly these divine beings taught us something.

All of these ideas have no evidence, yet you're assuming that they are true using nothing but faith as evidence... hence, a presumption.


Edited by Tolgak - 20 September 2006 at 4:52pm
Back to Top
mbro View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Original Forum Gangster

Joined: 11 June 2002
Location: Isle Of Man
Status: Offline
Points: 10743
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mbro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 September 2006 at 4:51pm
Originally posted by Tolgak Tolgak wrote:


Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:


Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

How can I use God's word to prove what Christ has taught us through the Holy spirit if those whom I speak to have no faith in Jesus?


Here is that presumption again.

What are you saying I am presuming?
That:A) God's word was indeed said by god and not invented by people.B) God's (possibly some storyteller's) word is true because you have faith in it.
No, he's presuming that we can't understand the word of god because he presumes that we do not believe in him or have the holy spirit.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Back to Top
Tolgak View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Master of MSPaint and bri's Daddy

Joined: 12 July 2002
Location: BEHIND YOU!
Status: Offline
Points: 1239481
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tolgak Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 September 2006 at 4:54pm
Yea, you got it better dude. I misinterpreted his sentence now that I think of it.

But I still think my statements are also presumed by him.

Edited by Tolgak - 20 September 2006 at 4:54pm
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 September 2006 at 4:54pm

Originally posted by mbro mbro wrote:

he presumes that we do not believe in him or have the holy spirit.

dingdingding

The biggest presumption of all is that anybody who disagrees with him doesn't believe.

Or perhaps it is circular reasoning instead of straight assumption:  "all who share the faith clearly would agree - therefore anybody who disagrees must not be of the faith.

It's the same circular logic that leads people to conclude that whoever does something that they disagree with (like terrorist acts) are, by definition, not of their faith.

How can Vigilante possibly know what my faith is?  Or the faith of anybody else who has an opinion on the subject?

 

 

EDIT - but yes, Vigilante is also making the assumptions stated by Tolgak.



Edited by Clark Kent - 20 September 2006 at 4:55pm
Back to Top
Badsmitty View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member

Parental Advisory Non Conformist

Joined: 22 July 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1760
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Badsmitty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 September 2006 at 10:09pm

If I'm lucky, both sides will kill each other off and take Israel with them for the trifecta.

Back to Top
MT. Vigilante View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Captain America

Joined: 01 February 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1454
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MT. Vigilante Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2006 at 11:18am
Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Originally posted by mbro mbro wrote:

he presumes that we do not believe in him or have the holy spirit.

dingdingding

The biggest presumption of all is that anybody who disagrees with him doesn't believe.

Or perhaps it is circular reasoning instead of straight assumption:  "all who share the faith clearly would agree - therefore anybody who disagrees must not be of the faith.

It's the same circular logic that leads people to conclude that whoever does something that they disagree with (like terrorist acts) are, by definition, not of their faith.

How can Vigilante possibly know what my faith is?  Or the faith of anybody else who has an opinion on the subject?

 

 

EDIT - but yes, Vigilante is also making the assumptions stated by Tolgak.



O.K. I will ask you straight up, do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah, thus do you believe that he is the Son of the Living God and thus he is God in the Flesh. Are you a born again Believer in Christ Jesus who has been Babtized in the the Holy Spirit and do you have a personal relationship with Christ Jesus as your personal savior.

If this is true than you are a Christian, that is all it takes.

Edited by MT. Vigilante - 21 September 2006 at 11:18am
Join the XP Re-Revolution!
Back to Top
mbro View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Original Forum Gangster

Joined: 11 June 2002
Location: Isle Of Man
Status: Offline
Points: 10743
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mbro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2006 at 11:32am
Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

O.K. I will ask you straight up, do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah, thus do you believe that he is the Son of the Living God and thus he is God in the Flesh. Are you a born again Believer in Christ Jesus who has been Babtized in the the Holy Spirit and do you have a personal relationship with Christ Jesus as your personal savior.If this is true than you are a Christian, that is all it takes.
Umm, so you don't think that in order to classify yourself as a christian that you should have to actually read the book, in its entirty, that the faith that you profess to be is based off? Seems like something that should be required.

And to answer your question.

"do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah"
    no
"do you believe that he is the Son of the Living God and thus he is God in the Flesh."
    no
"Are you a born again Believer in Christ Jesus"
    no
"who has been Babtized in the the Holy Spirit"
    yes
"do you have a personal relationship with Christ Jesus as your personal savior"
    no


Now I ask you this. Have you read the ENTIRE bible, not just the passages that they read in church? Becuase I have and that is my reasoning for the answers I gave above.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Back to Top
MT. Vigilante View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Captain America

Joined: 01 February 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1454
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MT. Vigilante Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2006 at 11:43am
Originally posted by mbro mbro wrote:

Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

O.K. I will ask you straight up, do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah, thus do you believe that he is the Son of the Living God and thus he is God in the Flesh. Are you a born again Believer in Christ Jesus who has been Babtized in the the Holy Spirit and do you have a personal relationship with Christ Jesus as your personal savior.If this is true than you are a Christian, that is all it takes.
Umm, so you don't think that in order to classify yourself as a christian that you should have to actually read the book, in its entirty, that the faith that you profess to be is based off? Seems like something that should be required...



Now I ask you this. Have you read the ENTIRE bible, not just the passages that they read in church? Becuase I have and that is my reasoning for the answers I gave above.


Yes I have read the entire Bible, many times infact. No you don't have to read the Bible in order to be saved, the Bible is an instruction manual for Christians on how to live thier lives, to grow in thier faith, and Build thier relationship with Christ Jesus.
    Yes God wants you to read his Word in order to grow in your faith and to better understand what he requires of us, but reading the Bible is not what saves us, faith in Christ Jesus and your belief in him that he is the Son of God is what saves us.

Edited by MT. Vigilante - 21 September 2006 at 11:44am
Join the XP Re-Revolution!
Back to Top
darkSIDEofMOON View Drop Down
Member
Member

Strike 2 - Language/Disrespect 9/13

Joined: 02 November 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 162
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote darkSIDEofMOON Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2006 at 11:59am
Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Originally posted by mbro mbro wrote:

he presumes that we do not believe in him or have the holy spirit.

dingdingding

The biggest presumption of all is that anybody who disagrees with him doesn't believe.

Or perhaps it is circular reasoning instead of straight assumption:  "all who share the faith clearly would agree - therefore anybody who disagrees must not be of the faith.

It's the same circular logic that leads people to conclude that whoever does something that they disagree with (like terrorist acts) are, by definition, not of their faith.

How can Vigilante possibly know what my faith is?  Or the faith of anybody else who has an opinion on the subject?

 

 

EDIT - but yes, Vigilante is also making the assumptions stated by Tolgak.



O.K. I will ask you straight up, do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah, thus do you believe that he is the Son of the Living God and thus he is God in the Flesh. Are you a born again Believer in Christ Jesus who has been Babtized in the the Holy Spirit and do you have a personal relationship with Christ Jesus as your personal savior.

If this is true than you are a Christian, that is all it takes.


those actually don't make you Christian...

maybe in your eyes, but in many others no.
oh no, strikes...watch out now..oooohhh
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2006 at 12:13pm

Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

O.K. I will ask you straight up, do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah, thus do you believe that he is the Son of the Living God and thus he is God in the Flesh. Are you a born again Believer in Christ Jesus who has been Babtized in the the Holy Spirit and do you have a personal relationship with Christ Jesus as your personal savior.
 

That's not a simple question with a simple answer - in fact, it is multiple questions/statements with a variety of possible combinations.

See, most people do not fall into convenient spiritual boxes.

What about a guy who grew up Baptist, was saved at early age, went to college and became a Buddhist, then rejected all beliefs and went atheist, repented and was saved again, then realized that evangelicals were evil and became a Mormon?

Or the guy who holds the same beliefs as you, just not very strongly, with frequent doubts and temporary failures of faith?

Faith is not simple.  Your attempt to cleanly categorize people into "us" and "other" fails.  For that reason, your simplistic statement that anybody who doesn't hold "x" beliefs cannot possibly understand statement "y" also fails.  Do either of the people in my examples understand, then not understand, then understand again, and then have their understanding turned off and on again like a lightswitch every time their faiths waxes or wanes?

Your reasoning is self-grandifying and nothing else.

Back to Top
Hades View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2003
Location: Virgin Islands
Status: Offline
Points: 12983
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2006 at 12:19pm
How does one have a personal relationship with Jesus? Wouldnt it be purely one sided at best?

Or is it, like says to self...."Jesus loves me." Warm feeling inside follows?

Even if you pray all the time, how can you even be sure Jesus is there listening? Maybe your thoughts are going out getting lost in space, and that warm feeling you have is gas.

Is faith the answer, cause that isnt convincing enough for me.
Back to Top
MT. Vigilante View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Captain America

Joined: 01 February 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1454
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MT. Vigilante Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2006 at 3:01pm
Originally posted by darkSIDEofMOON darkSIDEofMOON wrote:

Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Originally posted by mbro mbro wrote:

he presumes that we do not believe in him or have the holy spirit.

dingdingding

The biggest presumption of all is that anybody who disagrees with him doesn't believe.

Or perhaps it is circular reasoning instead of straight assumption:  "all who share the faith clearly would agree - therefore anybody who disagrees must not be of the faith.

It's the same circular logic that leads people to conclude that whoever does something that they disagree with (like terrorist acts) are, by definition, not of their faith.

How can Vigilante possibly know what my faith is?  Or the faith of anybody else who has an opinion on the subject?

 

 

EDIT - but yes, Vigilante is also making the assumptions stated by Tolgak.



O.K. I will ask you straight up, do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah, thus do you believe that he is the Son of the Living God and thus he is God in the Flesh. Are you a born again Believer in Christ Jesus who has been Babtized in the the Holy Spirit and do you have a personal relationship with Christ Jesus as your personal savior.

If this is true than you are a Christian, that is all it takes.


those actually don't make you Christian...

maybe in your eyes, but in many others no.


No thats not what makes you a christian in my eyes, its what makes you a christian in God's eyes, for Jesus said in John 14:6

       " I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. "

    So your arguement is not with me, it is with God and his word.

Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:

O.K. I will ask you straight up, do you believe that Jesus is the Messiah, thus do you believe that he is the Son of the Living God and thus he is God in the Flesh. Are you a born again Believer in Christ Jesus who has been Babtized in the the Holy Spirit and do you have a personal relationship with Christ Jesus as your personal savior.


That's not a simple question with a simple answer - in fact, it is multiple questions/statements with a variety of possible combinations.

See, most people do not fall into convenient spiritual boxes.

What about a guy who grew up Baptist, was saved at early age, went to college and became a Buddhist, then rejected all beliefs and went atheist, repented and was saved again, then realized that evangelicals were evil and became a Mormon?

Or the guy who holds the same beliefs as you, just not very strongly, with frequent doubts and temporary failures of faith?

Faith is not simple.  Your attempt to cleanly categorize people into "us" and "other" fails.  For that reason, your simplistic statement that anybody who doesn't hold "x" beliefs cannot possibly understand statement "y" also fails.  Do either of the people in my examples understand, then not understand, then understand again, and then have their understanding turned off and on again like a lightswitch every time their faiths waxes or wanes?

Your reasoning is self-grandifying and nothing else.



First of all I wish to apologize if it has seemed like I am trying to grandify myself, that could not be further from the truth. I wish all glory to go to God and none for myself. I am just another sinner, the same as anyone else.

As for what you said in the areas I highlighted, you are describing the condition of most Christians, yes even myself somtimes. All Christians stumble somtimes, and fail God in thier faith at others, the wonderfull thing about God is that he will take you back and forgive you everytime. But thier is only one catagory, as the Bible says in Romans 10:9;

    " That if you confess with your mouth "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

But that does not mean you can just say those words and go live as you want, for it isn't the words that God wants from you, it is for you to believe in him with your heart. As the Bible goes on to say in verse 10;
       " For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified,..."

Originally posted by Hades Hades wrote:

How does one have a personal relationship with Jesus? Wouldnt it be purely one sided at best?

Or is it, like says to self...."Jesus loves me." Warm feeling inside follows?

Even if you pray all the time, how can you even be sure Jesus is there listening? Maybe your thoughts are going out getting lost in space, and that warm feeling you have is gas.

Is faith the answer, cause that isnt convincing enough for me.


That is difficult to put into words how God reveals himself to us, becuase it is far more than just a "warm feeling inside." But faith is a major part of our relationship with Jesus, but that faith is backed up by how he reveals himself to us, wich is often different for each person, that is why it is a personal relationship. But if you want God to prove to you he exists, just ask him to, but remember the answer may or may not come right away, God answers prayer in his own time in order for us to rely on him.

Join the XP Re-Revolution!
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2006 at 3:07pm

Originally posted by MT. Vigilante MT. Vigilante wrote:


First of all I wish to apologize if it has seemed like I am trying to grandify myself, that could not be further from the truth. I wish all glory to go to God and none for myself.

Well said.

Quote As for what you said in the areas I highlighted, you are describing the condition of most Christians, yes even myself somtimes.

Of course - which leads me back to my actual point.  Your statement, a few posts back, was essentially that if you aren't a believer you couldn't understand.  I am saying that this makes no sense because, as we all agree, faith is not a constant thing, but a moving and changing thing.  Intellectual knowledge, on the other hand, doesn't come and go that easily.  Faith-gained intellectual knowledge will not simply evaporate when the faith is having an off day.

Back to Top
Joe Cool View Drop Down
Member
Member


Joined: 05 March 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 59
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Cool Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 September 2006 at 9:25pm

 

I choose c, arrogance. Ignorance would indicate a lack of knowledge that such posts existed, clearly I proved I knew they were there. Laziness is really not much of an option either. My time is precious to me and the feeding frenzy that follows the name Jesus has brought me to the conclusion it is an utter waste of time to watch pre-adolescents jump on the band wagon of hurling insults at those who have faith.


I won't bother to quote myself as having the same content 3 times is excessive redundancy. You argue that crime is not black and white. Please explain this, the motive of a crime is immaterial, theft is theft, murder is murder, there is a victim and a perp.


   OK, now please explain how the justice system in the US fails the criminal in the majority of cases? Thousands if not millions of dollars are dumped into the legal fees, incarceration or death of a prisoner. Society exists primarily for the protection of the law-abiding citizen. But for a strictly secular society, who is it that you swear before in court, "so help me..." Feel free to fill in the blank.

    Lastly, it is a nice fantasy world that you live in, but it is not to be so. Public Service is generally entered by the B team of society at best, because in the US those who wish to be truly successful go to the private sector where there is money to be made. Public service on the other hand falls to those with patriotism (US soldiers), those seeking security, the pliable, those seeking security and finally the ones who would otherwise find themselves flipping burgers. For example, teachers must have x number of college credits to become eligible to become a teacher, but the testing to enter a job should be passable by an 8th grade drop out. Policemen despite the huge leaps in technology require only a highschool diploma and politicians need only be able to check a box.  

    Let me make this simple for you, Muslim extremists have always hated the western democracies and they always will. The notion that the world ever stood together to denounce terrorism is false. People throughout the world rejoiced when the towers fell. The Pope's words have changed nothing, will incite no more or less violence, instead they will be used as an excuse. 


  The nun you speak of was actually shot in the back, I highly doubt the dead care much if they're bodies are torn to shreds. Furthermore it is time those like you woke up and faced the reality that as long as religious fanatics (I won't single out Muslims) or despots are allowed to infiltrate, cow and dominate nations that noone will ever be permitted to live without fear of retribution for anything other then living in a free republic. Lastly, if you are indeed a soldier, then you should understand that you put that uniform on with the knowledge that you were putting the safety of your nation before your own. That is why the American soldier is still respected by the vast majority of Americans. Canadian soldiers I would hold on par with lets be generous, mailmen.

Welcome to the internet.

  Agreed. 

   The Declaration of Independence not a legal document? I would say that it was at the least legitamized after the secession from Britain was complete. But I gather you are talking in terms of making law. Agreed, other then the fact that it makes the precept of the " One nation, under God."

   You cut and paste history quite a bit. Henry the VII was the first Tudor king. Under his reign he utterly robbed the churches and monasteries throughout England in order to gain wealth for the crown. This very nearly cost him both the throneand England as a sovereign nation as a civil war of the magnitude that he faced would have left an already exhausted England open for invasion.

     In between Henry VIII and Elizabeth came two others whom you left out. Edward, who was a protestant and Mary the Catholic. Under the stewardship of each England would experience sectarian violence, particularly under Mary's longer and bloody rule. Though it is true that Elizabeth eventually would make Britain into the premier European power it was after a rather fanciful balancing act between the divided christian sects.

    Congratualtions you realize that Ferdinand was in fact a red herring. Lincoln ran on the ticket of ending slavery, which obviously made him popular with the growing abolishment movement that had been fermenting in the country. If you look into the history of the Abolishinist movement you will find it took root in the church, and regardless of what you would like to believe this had a widespread effect on what would transpire throughout the 1860's. This would be a clear example of religion influencing the outcome of a nation's history.

    This seems to be a change in your position as the US in your opinion has gone from being secular to secularizing. I will agree with your latter stance, however as long as there is a vast portion of the population that votes based upon religious values then it will be nearly impossible to list the US as a secular government.

    The first amendment states nothing beyond the government shall not foster a state religion. The drafters of the Constitution were by and large men of faith who both realized the problems that state religions had caused throughout Europe and were determined that such troubles would not be revisited in this country. Although it is possible to have a non-theocratic government with a state religion, the US was going to make a complete break from Europe and take every step to ensure there would be no ties to any particular country.

 



Edited by Joe Cool - 21 September 2006 at 9:30pm
Life is tough, its tougher if you're stupid. - John Wayne
Back to Top
Destruction View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 August 2003
Location: Burundi
Status: Offline
Points: 3440
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Destruction Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 September 2006 at 12:13am
Y'Plagu, anyone?

Yea, I still remember that.
u dont know what to do ur getting mottor boatted

Men are from Magmar, women are from Venusaur.
Back to Top
brihard View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - Making stuff up

Joined: 05 September 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 10156
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote brihard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 September 2006 at 1:04am
Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

 

I choose c, arrogance. Ignorance would indicate a lack of knowledge that such posts existed, clearly I proved I knew they were there. Laziness is really not much of an option either. My time is precious to me and the feeding frenzy that follows the name Jesus has brought me to the conclusion it is an utter waste of time to watch pre-adolescents jump on the band wagon of hurling insults at those who have faith.

And yet you'll readily spend a lengthy amount of time typing out a reply to someone you've shown nothing but contempt and disrespect towards. And I'm still waiting for that apology for the crack about my mother.

Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

I won't bother to quote myself as having the same content 3 times is excessive redundancy. You argue that crime is not black and white. Please explain this, the motive of a crime is immaterial, theft is theft, murder is murder, there is a victim and a perp.

OK, now please explain how the justice system in the US fails the criminal in the majority of cases? Thousands if not millions of dollars are dumped into the legal fees, incarceration or death of a prisoner. Society exists primarily for the protection of the law-abiding citizen. But for a strictly secular society, who is it that you swear before in court, "so help me..." Feel free to fill in the blank.


This would take a lot more space and time than I have available here- your understanding is incomplete, and clearly you've not rationally analyzed the notion of crime. I will create a separate thread for this purpose. As an undergraduate student in criminology I welcome the discussion and the opportunity to educate you and others.


Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

Lastly, it is a nice fantasy world that you live in, but it is not to be so. Public Service is generally entered by the B team of society at best, because in the US those who wish to be truly successful go to the private sector where there is money to be made. Public service on the other hand falls to those with patriotism (US soldiers), those seeking security, the pliable, those seeking security and finally the ones who would otherwise find themselves flipping burgers. For example, teachers must have x number of college credits to become eligible to become a teacher, but the testing to enter a job should be passable by an 8th grade drop out. Policemen despite the huge leaps in technology require only a highschool diploma and politicians need only be able to check a box.

I'm not American. That being said, you greatly overrate the quality of people to be found in private enterprise and bureaucracy. You proceed to slam teachers and police officers. Perhaps you were unfortunate to only have bad teachers, but most of mine were excellent. Siliarly, the demands for police officers up here are increasingly academic in addition to maturity, life experience, etc. You won't find an 18 year old coming out of high school and becoming a cop here. College diplomas and university degrees are  the norm. Many of these job positions are filld by those with a genuine desire to help people. It's curious the examples you should choose- I'm a university student and a soldier, finishing a degree towards becoming a police officer, after which I plan to enter teaching.

Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

Let me make this simple for you, Muslim extremists have always hated the western democracies and they always will. The notion that the world ever stood together to denounce terrorism is false. People throughout the world rejoiced when the towers fell. The Pope's words have changed nothing, will incite no more or less violence, instead they will be used as an excuse.

Of course. I have friends and comerades currently engaged in battle in Afghanistan against these extremists. I know of at least one who's come home wounded. My stepmother's over there. Once I finish my degree I'm going. I will lay down my life if need be to protect the freedoms of those of you who choose to remain at home comfortable in private enterprise or whatever you so choose. There's no need to educate me about the radicals- In the many decades I expect to live the world shall eventually enter such a state where it's us or them, and I will do whatever is asked of me to ensure it's the former.

Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

The nun you speak of was actually shot in the back, I highly doubt the dead care much if they're bodies are torn to shreds. Furthermore it is time those like you woke up and faced the reality that as long as religious fanatics (I won't single out Muslims) or despots are allowed to infiltrate, cow and dominate nations that noone will ever be permitted to live without fear of retribution for anything other then living in a free republic. Lastly, if you are indeed a soldier, then you should understand that you put that uniform on with the knowledge that you were putting the safety of your nation before your own. That is why the American soldier is still respected by the vast majority of Americans. Canadian soldiers I would hold on par with lets be generous, mailmen.

I absolutely love it when a person shoots themself in the foot with ignorance. Clearly you're utterly ignorant of the high esteem in which your country's soldiers hold our troops. 2nd battallion Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry hold a presidential unit citation. Joint Task Force Two (professionally equivalent to Delta, SAS, GSG-9, etc) likewise. Over a dozen Canadians have been awarded silver or bronze stars. Canadian forces operating in Afghanistan led American, British, and Dutch units in a highly intense battle west of Kandaahar in the past few weeks, killing over 1500 taliban soldiers and forcing even more than that farther into the hinterlands.

Canadian soldiers are regarded as THE most professional troops in Afghanistan at this time. I challenge you, before slandering the organization of which I am a part, to join your own nation's army, have the balls to serve your country, and ask those who've fought with my comrades what they think of us. I daresay you'd receive a hostile response to your attitude from the extremely deadly and professional soldiers in the American army who universally express themselves as honoured to fight alongside our forces- and that they trust our men any day of the week in any situation. We don't cut and run- we kick the snot out of anyone who messes with us or our allies.

Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

Welcome to the internet.

  Agreed. 

   The Declaration of Independence not a legal document? I would say that it was at the least legitamized after the secession from Britain was complete. But I gather you are talking in terms of making law. Agreed, other then the fact that it makes the precept of the " One nation, under God."


No, it's not. Find me a case in common law where the declaration has been held to have legally binding power. The constitution, certainly, but the declaration of independence is a poltiical document ratified by the second congress to justify secession from Britain. It has no legal standing whatsoever- its value is entirely philosophical and historical.

Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

   You cut and paste history quite a bit. Henry the VII was the first Tudor king. Under his reign he utterly robbed the churches and monasteries throughout England in order to gain wealth for the crown. This very nearly cost him both the throneand England as a sovereign nation as a civil war of the magnitude that he faced would have left an already exhausted England open for invasion.

     In between Henry VIII and Elizabeth came two others whom you left out. Edward, who was a protestant and Mary the Catholic. Under the stewardship of each England would experience sectarian violence, particularly under Mary's longer and bloody rule. Though it is true that Elizabeth eventually would make Britain into the premier European power it was after a rather fanciful balancing act between the divided christian sects.


Aside form showing the dubious moral value of religion as a function of a state in the first place, you're off track of that original line of discussion, which was the separation of church and state- you drew the historical example of the Tudors, and then claim religious motivation- nonsense, religion was a means used to justify an end; pillage on the part of Henry VII, and personal self-interest on the part of Henry VIII. Then England experienced a weak and short regency under Edward, a hectic and short monarchy under Mary, before Elizabeth took over and managed to make England great despite religion's influence on the state. You're off your original point regardless, which seemed to be expressing your approval of the role of the Church in the U.S., through your endorsement of 'one nation, under God'. And yet you contradict yourself with historical example of what happens when a state endorses religion, and then the next ruler changes their mind. You've not rebutted me in any way- merely strengthened my argument.

Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

Congratualtions you realize that Ferdinand was in fact a red herring.

It's called historical analysis. You should try it some time.

Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

Lincoln ran on the ticket of ending slavery, which obviously made him popular with the growing abolishment movement that had been fermenting in the country. If you look into the history of the Abolishinist movement you will find it took root in the church, and regardless of what you would like to believe this had a widespread effect on what would transpire throughout the 1860's. This would be a clear example of religion influencing the outcome of a nation's history.

    This seems to be a change in your position as the US in your opinion has gone from being secular to secularizing. I will agree with your latter stance, however as long as there is a vast portion of the population that votes based upon religious values then it will be nearly impossible to list the US as a secular government.


The U.S. as a polticial entity is secular. Demographics show that society as comprised of individuals is secularizing. It's not a change in position at all- read what I actually write, not what you think you'd like to read for the purpose of finding fault. I cite the state as a legal and political entity, and society as a cultural and demographic entity.

I did not argue that the church has had a role in history- my argument is it has no rightful place impacting on the state in the present. The discussion of the civil war was argued only because I wished to point out that slavery was one of many factors, which you yourself has admitted as true- thus I've no further debate on that part.

Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

The first amendment states nothing beyond the government shall not foster a state religion.

It states several other things in fact, but I know what you mean- and you're still incorrect. While congress does prohibit a 'law respecting an establishment of religion', it also protects the free exercise thereof. The first amendment is far more than merely prohibitor with regards to religion- it specifically protects it in a legalistically secular manner.

Originally posted by Joe Cool Joe Cool wrote:

The drafters of the Constitution were by and large men of faith who both realized the problems that state religions had caused throughout Europe and were determined that such troubles would not be revisited in this country. Although it is possible to have a non-theocratic government with a state religion, the US was going to make a complete break from Europe and take every step to ensure there would be no ties to any particular country.

Correct.

Now in closing, since you've not deigned to reply in the other thread (or perhaps you forgot- easy to do when it's on page three), I'll repeat my comments at the end of that thread:

Lets's sum up. To date you have:

  • Called me a misguided youth. (Opinion and conjecture)
  • Called my mother a crack addict. (Incorrect)
  • Stated I would do poorly in private enterprise. (Speculation)
  • Implied the inherent intelectual inferiority of public service. (Incorrect and rude)
  • Accused me of failing history (Incorrect)
  • Made erroneous statements about the Gulf War and American Civil war. (See previous line for irony)
  • Attempted to draw analogy from British history that wasn't there- botching Henry VIII's last name along the way.
  • Shown deliberate and transparent bias in discussion of religion.
  • Failed to suply concrete evidence to support same.
  • Incorrectly applied economic, historical, and strategic viewpoints to world conflicts. (Excusable- I'll assume you're a victim of your education and political prejudice)
Just so you know where I stand. Again, I invite you to enlighten us to your professional and educational background to try to generate some credibility.


Edited by brihard - 22 September 2006 at 7:53pm
"Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation."

-FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011.

Yup, he actually said that.
Back to Top
Tolgak View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Master of MSPaint and bri's Daddy

Joined: 12 July 2002
Location: BEHIND YOU!
Status: Offline
Points: 1239481
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tolgak Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 September 2006 at 2:10am
Add one more insult on to that brihard. Apparently we're a bunch of pre-adolecents following a trend.

TKD and I are first year students in college. Rednekk is two years older than me. Mbro has been in college for a while now and many of the others arguing in this thread range from high school sophomores to physically mature adults. Don't accuse us of being young and stupid because are arguments are against yours. Sure, there are some people in this thread that have jumped on the wagon, I acknowledge that. But you shouldn't assume us ALL immature just because it is so easy for the misguided to follow the majority in the argument.

Also, you ever stop to think that a lot of people on this forum have reconsidered what they were taught as children? I know I was taught to be Islamic and believe in Allah and all that jazz, and believed in it until a few years ago. I wasn't rebelling when I renounced my beliefs. I don't believe I made a stupid call when I said that what I believed in for the first 15 years of my life was BS. It was a well thought out decision that I made over the course of a month, and now I can't be more free from the constraints of religious belief.

From my perspective, the only immaturity I see in this thread comes from your text Joe. My belief is that religion closes one's mind. It seems that you have closed your mind before coming to this thread, expecting the worst, and in fact producing what I believe are the same kind of arguments you wanted to avoid.

Also, notice the BELIEVE. I'm not saying you DID close your mind. I'm saying I THINK it did. I believe that that statement is very important in controversial topics. At the very least, saying "I believe" can prevent a lot of remarks from becoming truly insulting. It also allows the acknowledgement of possible error in one's ideas. Might want to try that next time you start typing. I will try to keep that in mind as well because I know my words also have the potential of inaccuracy and insult.

At the very least I think we should all think a bit more about how we present our ideas before we post. Being smart about how we say things will make these discussions a whole lot less hostile.


Edited by Tolgak - 22 September 2006 at 2:14am
Back to Top
Tippmania View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar
No, IM right!

Joined: 13 September 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tippmania Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 September 2006 at 2:49am
Hah! I knew this thread would end in FlAmEs! 
Tippmann A-5
- Shocktech Drop + On\Off
- Super R\T
- Q.E.V.
- Red Hot Powertube
- Stock
- Flatline + Metadyne Shroud
- R.I.S. Foregrip
- X-Core
- Macro
- BT Fixed Sight Rail
Back to Top
choopie911 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Commie Canuck

Joined: 01 June 2003
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 30745
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote choopie911 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 September 2006 at 3:28am
Originally posted by Tippmania Tippmania wrote:

Hah! I knew this thread would end in <span style="color: rgb(255, 153, 51); font-weight: bold;">FlAmEs!</span>


How long have you been waiting to bust that gem out?...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.250 seconds.