[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Agreed: I would not agree with taking it to there, or anywhere near.[/quote]
Ok.
What was the point you were trying to make in practical terms?
Actually, very little point. I had seen the quiz in the comments to a news article about an Iraqi man in the United States running down his daughter with his car for her having had sex or something like that.
And found the quiz moderately amusing, not because of subject matter but in how it was done. I did change the ending to have at least a little bit of a point, as there are people who unlike you are so unreasonable as to ABSOLUTELY disagree with any idea of “profiling.”
One of the other persons commenting wrote something about how, having posted that and favoring such profiling, the person was a racist, redneck piece of sh** and all kinds of other epithets.
So in fact it is not so clear to everyone that “profiling” can indeed be appropriate, but it needs to be handled carefully.
For example, let’s say that two students wish to enter the United States to study. One is of some ethnicity and national origin that has utterly zero historical connection with terrorism, while the other is let’s say coming from an Arab country.
Now, I think both should have equal chance. But there should be more investigation of the second student.
Assuming that all appears well, I would be completely opposed to this second student being stopped on a day-to-day basis for questioning.
But let’s say if he places an order for ammonium nitrate, this ought to raise more red flags than a farmer in Kansas doing so.
However, there are others – namely, barking moonbats – in the US who scream that this is not so, that such is “racism” and cannot be tolerated.
But this is nothing new, so counts as “very little point.”
I agree with Bill Roberts, the very large majority of those who do these things belong to one group. This is also the reason why Bill Maher’s Politically Incorrect was canceled, because he pointed out the same thing Bill Roberts did.
Posting a list of hijacks, assassinations and terrorist activities in relation to a story about some whacko who ran over his daughter because she had sex, would qualify the poster for an even cruder series of epitephs.
It qualifies as hatemongering in my eyes. You find it amusing because you don’t have to put up with the people calling you a terrorist without knowing anything more about you than your name. What seems like harmless fun to you is actually forwarding the agenda of some people you would abhor.
Arabs have sex with boys and sexually mutilate thier little girls… All you really need to know about them.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Posting a list of hijacks, assassinations and terrorist activities in relation to a story about some whacko who ran over his daughter because she had sex, would qualify the poster for an even cruder series of epitephs. [/quote]
I disagree. They are quite related.
The terrorists committing the acts in question did so because they found doing so to be in accordance with their religion as they understand it. Why do I say that? Because they say so themselves.
The father who ran over his daughter with his car likewise did so because he believed it to be in accordance with that same religion.
And for nearly an hour there, or perhaps just over, I thought you were being reasonable this time.
And no, the amusing part is not the profiling part… what I said was that I thought the way it was done was a little amusing. Perhaps you have no sense of humor. (If you’ve had one funny line in one post, ever, I admit to not having seen it.)
I don’t think it forwards any agenda other than one of adding a little discredit to those who insist there should be no “profiling” of any kind.
I’ve noticed an unfortunate correlation between religious fundamentalism and animosity/intolerance/insularism/moral superiority/aggressiveness/violence toward others that see the world differently.
The more convinced you are of the absolute, exclusive, undeniable truth of your brand of religion, the more justified you feel in judging and persecuting others that see the world differently.
After all, if God is on your side, how could anything you do (including murder, warfare, and ethnic cleansing) be anything but right?
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Actually, very little point. I had seen the quiz in the comments to a news article about an Iraqi man in the United States running down his daughter with his car for her having had sex or something like that.
And found the quiz moderately amusing, not because of subject matter but in how it was done. I did change the ending to have at least a little bit of a point, as there are people who unlike you are so unreasonable as to ABSOLUTELY disagree with any idea of “profiling.”
One of the other persons commenting wrote something about how, having posted that and favoring such profiling, the person was a racist, redneck piece of sh** and all kinds of other epithets.
So in fact it is not so clear to everyone that “profiling” can indeed be appropriate, but it needs to be handled carefully.
For example, let’s say that two students wish to enter the United States to study. One is of some ethnicity and national origin that has utterly zero historical connection with terrorism, while the other is let’s say coming from an Arab country.
Now, I think both should have equal chance. But there should be more investigation of the second student.
Assuming that all appears well, I would be completely opposed to this second student being stopped on a day-to-day basis for questioning.
But let’s say if he places an order for ammonium nitrate, this ought to raise more red flags than a farmer in Kansas doing so.
However, there are others – namely, barking moonbats – in the US who scream that this is not so, that such is “racism” and cannot be tolerated.
But this is nothing new, so counts as “very little point.”[/quote]
Hey now we have some radicals in Kansas, but still not as scary as some other radicals not from our country.
[quote]forlife wrote:
I’ve noticed an unfortunate correlation between religious fundamentalism and animosity/intolerance/insularism/moral superiority/aggressiveness/violence toward others that see the world differently.
The more convinced you are of the absolute, exclusive, undeniable truth of your brand of religion, the more justified you feel in persecuting others that see the world differently.
After all, if God is on your side, how could anything you do (including murder, warfare, and ethnic cleansing) be anything but right?[/quote]
Because murder, war, and ethnic cleansing of your neighbors is forbidden. So I know it is not right.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
Because murder, war, and ethnic cleansing of your neighbors is forbidden. So I know it is not right.[/quote]
It’s only forbidden unless your God gives you permission to do it. How else would you explain the murder, war, and ethnic cleansing in the bible?
[quote]forlife wrote:
I’ve noticed an unfortunate correlation between religious fundamentalism and animosity/intolerance/insularism/moral superiority/aggressiveness/violence toward others that see the world differently.
The more convinced you are of the absolute, exclusive, undeniable truth of your brand of religion, the more justified you feel in judging and persecuting others that see the world differently.
After all, if God is on your side, how could anything you do (including murder, warfare, and ethnic cleansing) be anything but right?[/quote]
Better throw Atheism in there. With all the comments on this forum alone about sheeple, brainwashed, child-indoctrinating, delusional, insane, Christian folk, we’re getting upstaged in the fanatical hatred department. It makes me feel inadequate.
Keep the thread on track please, Christianity and its shortcomings can be discussed elsewhere.
It doesn’t pose the risk that Islam does to society as a whole.
But what if you build a time traveling machine and wind up in the Inquisition?
SEE??!?!?!
That could happen to anyone, anytime.
Well, at least to those that experiment with time machines.
Or it could be that some weren’t able to score so well on the test.
[quote]forlife wrote:
The more convinced you are of the absolute, exclusive, undeniable truth of your brand of religion, the more justified you feel in judging and persecuting others that see the world differently.
[/quote]
I agree with this. I see it almost daily with the religiousness of atheists, union members, and environmentalists.
[quote]Makavali wrote:
Keep the thread on track please, Christianity and its shortcomings can be discussed elsewhere.
It doesn’t pose the risk that Islam does to society as a whole.[/quote]
Nor does it pose the risk of someone just walking around with out health insurance.
Can you believe people do that? It’s like getting behind the wheel of your car knowing that you are uninsured…
Man someone ought to do something about those people.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
The father who ran over his daughter with his car likewise did so because he believed it to be in accordance with that same religion. [/quote]
And you know that how? Through your time-travel machine?
The father has not been caught yet so has not given his testimony. Perhaps you are right, Lixy: this could be the first case or perhaps a rare case of a Muslim committing or atttempting to commit an “honor killing” that he in fact did not think was in accordance with his religion.
But we know for a fact that very, very many “honor killings” are done by Muslims saying it is in accordance with their religion as they understand it.
Whether this particular case is one, or we would need to point to another, is not of great importance to the general question of whether Muslims who kill others – “infidels” or insufficiently pious Muslims – out of belief that their religion teaches them to so kill and rewards it, is one of the major problems in the world today.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
The father has not been caught yet so has not given his testimony. Perhaps you are right, Lixy: this could be the first case or perhaps a rare case of a Muslim committing or atttempting to commit an “honor killing” that he in fact did not think was in accordance with his religion.
But we know for a fact that very, very many “honor killings” are done by Muslims saying it is in accordance with their religion as they understand it.
Whether this particular case is one, or we would need to point to another, is not of great importance to the general question of whether Muslims who kill others – “infidels” or insufficiently pious Muslims – out of belief that their religion teaches them to so kill and rewards it, is one of the major problems in the world today.[/quote]
So, what you and the other folks on the comments of the article did, was infer the motive of the crime from the religion of the perpetrator (oftentimes, the name was enough for some morons to do the same on this very forum - I distinctly remember a similar case where the father turned out to be Christian much to the dismay of said morons).
You have to realize that not every crime committed by someone who claims to profess Islam is committed in the name of Islam.
Your so-called amusing quiz is nothing but transparent hatemongering propaganda. Sadly, it’s an attitude that is starting to make it into the mainstream. You (and whoever posted it) go as far as to present Bobby Kennedy’s assassin as a Muslim, because he looks like he might be one and his name sounds A-rab.
I am commenting on this thread because I am sincerely appalled. Appalled by the fact that even you, Bill Roberts, are dropping your guard when it comes to relaying falsehoods and shaky speculation. Despite our differences of opinion, I still think highly of your intellect (and I’m not the only one). And when even you fall for misinformation and start advocating government-sponsored ethnic discrimination in the world’s melting pot, I start to fear for my physical integrity.
This from a Muslim who couldn’t be more shamed about what is done in the name of his religion: I implore you. Don’t cave in and follow easy shortcuts or hasty generalizations. Don’t make us lose hope. And I respectfully apologize for turning a funny-bone-flexing thread into a debate.
[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
Makavali wrote:
Keep the thread on track please, Christianity and its shortcomings can be discussed elsewhere.
It doesn’t pose the risk that Islam does to society as a whole.
Nor does it pose the risk of someone just walking around with out health insurance.
Can you believe people do that? It’s like getting behind the wheel of your car knowing that you are uninsured…
Man someone ought to do something about those people.
[/quote]
Actually if you’re in your car you have this thing called: Car insurance, that will cover you.