Post: #51

(06-21-2016 10:58 AM)RexImperator Wrote:  Islam, especially Salafist variety, is not just a religion, it is also a political system. Communism was another political system that posed a threat to Western civilization in the past. However, while it was possible to be critical of communism, because of the climate of political correctness and "multiculturalism" it is much more difficult to publicly criticise Islam, which being a religion, is thus able to shield itself behind "religious tolerance" in a way communism never could.

I like the sentiment but, if I may, communism is why we have political correctness and multiculturalism. It's the software that protects Islam, and as such it trumps it as a danger.

As you can see, and perhaps increasingly perceive, the ideologies of communism are so insidious that we mostly fail to notice their origins.

Before communism, we un-apologetically kept Islam in the undeveloped nations where it belongs in quarantine. The ideological viruses developed on the foundation of Internationalist Trotskyism is what let it out of the basement.

Beyond this, crypto-communism today poses a legitimate genocidal threat within western nations. We see this with the importation of millions of third world drones, white-privilege politics, anti-police politics, anti-fa, and all of the movements associated with them that are driving the underclass to blood-lust. Communism also has an alarming 20th century precedent for mass murder of tens of millions over the Eurasian land-mass.

In contrast, Islam is too unintegrated and visible to pose much of a direct genocidal risk any time in the near future in the developed West; taken is isolation away from the rest of the communist-enabled movements. We could simply fight them. Fighting communism effectively, today, would likely take the form of a brother-on-brother civil war and even then you couldn't be sure that you had eliminated it.

Post: #52

h3ltrsk3ltr, respectfully disagree with you:

(06-23-2016 12:14 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  I disagree that Christianity is inherently less violent, however. Until the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the neutering of the church by Luther, the Islamic world was a thriving hub of trade, innovation and progressive ideals.

Most Islamic 'innovations' were actually copied from other cultures. When it comes to cultural and technological innovations, Islam produced very little on its own. Also, it can be argued that the Golden age of Islam ended with Mongol conquests in the 13th century.

(06-23-2016 12:14 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  The crusades, the inquisition, the interdict, feudalism...bros, the Christian world is replete with a violent history.

The Crusades were a noble undertaking aimed at recapturing originally Christian lands from foreign conquerors. They were of course violent just like any other war, but this violence is on the same moral level as the violence of someone who uses force to defend his family from burglars.

(06-23-2016 12:14 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  Since 1500, as the GDP of the west began to outstrip the east/middle east, the Arabic world and its Islamic religion was shunted into a corner. The violence we're seeing has less to do with Islam than a bunch of people put into a situation that would make anyone react violently.

This is a PC myth promoted by the Left. Read the Koran, you'll find it's full of texts that promote violence and war against non-believers. You'll find nothing of the sort in the Bible, for example.

(06-23-2016 12:14 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  Now, before you accuse me of being an SJW, I think the solution is to just quash Islam outright. While there's nothing inherently evil about it, it's a vehicle for the unrest and terrorist acts of a bunch of pissed off Muslims.

They ought to be viewed with suspicion.

They're getting the short end of the stick this millennium, shit happens.

Agree. Islam should be contained, or else we're all fucked.

Post: #53

delete

Post: #54

(06-23-2016 04:27 AM)hydrogonian Wrote:  ...
I like the sentiment but, if I may, communism is why we have political correctness and multiculturalism. It's the software that protects Islam, and as such it trumps it as a danger.
...

The cultural Marxism we suffer under in the West is not in the service of Communism. It is simply the utter rejection of everything that our nations were founded on, to be replaced with a vague and undefinable concept of "social justice".

Islam is gaining strength because nature abhors a vacuum, and a lack of cultural identity is a vacuum into which a raw, unsympathetic, unapologetic force like Islam will inevitably be drawn.

What we are entering into is not communism. Marxist methods for destroying capitalism are being used, yes, but not in the service of creating a communist society. What the elites have planned is something else entirely.

Post: #55

(06-23-2016 05:34 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  The cultural Marxism we suffer under in the West is not in the service of Communism. It is simply the utter rejection of everything that our nations were founded on, to be replaced with a vague and undefinable concept of "social justice".

In my opinion, it serves communism precisely.

If I may, you have to stop seeing communism as an economic movement. It wasn't and isn't, except secondarily. It didn't and doesn't need socialist economic policy or class war to thrive, though that would likely be its final resting state in all scenarios. But for its primary goal, which is in the social sphere, socialist economic policy may serve as a tool but it is not required.

Communism, as opposed to economic socialism, is the ideology of the individual.

That is, it is the ideology of removing all social ties that produce political power that might challenge a hostile foreign ruling elite.

That's its primary goal.

Everything else is smoke and mirrors, or entirely secondary.

In essence, it is 'anti-nationalism'. It is a weapon for this purpose of destroying any type of political potency for anyone but a hostile elite, and not an actual political ideology unto itself except when promoting a politically null class war as its false front.

Valid political ideologies produce political power. Communism's only goal is to remove political power. It's fake interest in the well-being of the proletariat doesn't lead to any actual, meaningful political power for the proletariat. When you understand how real political power is always incubated, that is through meaningful and inter-generational social bonds, this becomes clear.

It's operation in destroying bonds instead of cultivating meaningful bonds is how you can identity if for what it is: a political weapon (wielded by a nationalist hostile elite) and not a legitimate political movement.

Ties of culture, family, and religion are removed in communism. That's its primary goal.

Inserting a false cohesion of economic 'brotherhood' is only a psychological placeholder for those aforementioned eradicated ties. It's merely to say 'here's a consolation prize after we destroy your sociopolitical bonds'. What they don't tell you is that the consolation prize, the so-called class unity of the international proletariat, is a political and social dead end for the proletariat. It will never produce any real political power as, among other aspects, the elite can readily manipulate this bond with a stroke of the pen when creating or restricting money or jobs.

The class war is a military and legal blunt instrument, and psychological placeholder, so that people do not again revert to more politically meaningful bonds as they are always want to do out of the natural or eventual recognition that those bonds are what create a political competitive advantage for resources. And also the recognition that these bonds produce a more meaningful, loving, and lower stress environment for them.

The institutionalized class war allows the elite to militarily or legally use force to suppress those more effective bonds.

Class unity was never and is not the goal in itself as its propagandists lead you to believe. If the above mentioned actual sociopolitical ties can be eradicated via another false front of a system (ie: a capitalist system, with a cultural Marxist and social justice political environment, wherein sociopolitical ties are destroyed), then the goal of communism has nevertheless been accomplished and the people live in a de facto communist state.

Is a Nationalistic democracy (ie: modern Israel) a communism or proto-communism? Why or why not?

Is an Internationalist social democracy (ie: the United States) a communism or proto-communism? Why or why not?

These are different types of nations with vastly different social environments and vastly differing degrees of political self-determination for their respective peoples. Yet, they are billed as essentially the same type of nations with similar-enough economic systems. How can that be? The difference is that one is a national / national socialist state and the other is a proto-comminust / communist state. Both in essence; in all but name.

The above description of the nature of political power is the hidden understanding of politics and communism. It's what they know.

Quote:Islam is gaining strength because nature abhors a vacuum, and a lack of cultural identity is a vacuum into which a raw, unsympathetic, unapologetic force like Islam will inevitably be drawn.

Islam is gaining strength because it is allowed to occupy USA and European geographical space, and it is protected from suppression by internationalist Trotskyists who will name every resistance to it 'racist', and deprive those who complain of jobs, until their primary enemies within those spaces are either completely subdued by it or destroyed. Then they will reign in Islam unless they are expecting it to be the ultimate lower class submission system going forward. That is also a possibility.

Islam is a drone army. It poses no actual threat except the threat that the Trotskyist elites allow it to pose. If we were given license, we could beat it back fairly easily with a combination of force and deportation, but mostly variously defunding it and destroying its supply lines.

The 'lack of cultural identity' has always been an expressed communist aim.

Quote:What we are entering into is not communism. Marxist methods for destroying capitalism are being used, yes, but not in the service of creating a communist society. What the elites have planned is something else entirely.

Well, agree to disagree. I'm not sure what you see in your tea leaves, but most influencers on the legitimate (non-Neocon) Right have traditionally seen the above pattern in theirs.

Post: #56

(06-23-2016 01:44 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  Compare the texts. One calls for endless war with non-believers. The other does not.

There is a difference between Christianity and the historical actions of governments with a Christian majority. The ancient geo-political machinations of unelected rulers of Christian majority nations is of no relevance to what the scriptures contain.

In times gone, literacy and access to scripture was highly limited. Government and organised religion also laid a heavy hand over how the Bible was to be interpreted. That is to say, render unto Caesar, render the rest to the church and shut the fuck up.

Now, in the age of literacy and instant access to information we see the true nature of the fruits of the Bible vs the fruits of the Koran. People are not reading the words of Christ, "self radicalising" and then going out to murder 50 gays in a nightclub. People reading the words of Mohammed on the other hand are committing terrorism in the name of Allah because that is precisely what the Koran instructs them to do.

Your historical equivocations are irrelevant. Bible plus literacy equals prosperity. Koran plus literacy equals terror.

I love you guys but...ya'll are damn crazy!

Neubache, how are the behaviors of a group irrelevant from the group itself??

The Koran plus literacy gave us the Ottomans, I don't see how that's a sum that equals terror. Maybe they haven't cranked out any ground breaking innovations in a while but you wouldn't either if you lived in the middle east after WWI.

The Bible is fucking violent. The old testament is story after story of people hacking each other to death and don't tell me "that's not applicable because it's the old testament" because both have been taught in Sunday school since 313AD.

Personally, I'd love to attend a "soldiers for jebus!" church.

Another reason why Christianity is more insidious a threat than Islam is that it isn't honest. When it was needed to keep order, Constantine used it for that. Torquemada used it to keep the peasants in line. Luther used it to break ties from an oppressive elite. The Pilgrims used it to get settlers for the Americas.

In the 19th century, Christianity sparked the birth of "morality" as a social construct that I believe signaled the doom of masculinity albeit a long way off.

Since then the RNC has used it for votes. Fox has used it for viewership. Switchfoot has used it to sell CDs, the media has used it for jokes and now SJWs are using it to bash on straight, conservative men.


So why is Christianity the theology for the good dudes and Islam the pathology of the bad dudes? They're all just dudes being used by some other dudes disguised as another dude!!




@ Hydronian. The GDP disparity (and subsequent reversion since around 1978) isn't some PC bullshit I made up brah, nor is it a helpful SJW talking point. It illustrates the negative affects of feminism and female consumerism on a world power quite nicely.

No offence to any of you, it's some interesting conversating.

Post: #57

Will have to pick this up tomorrow, but both posts are good material for thought.

Post: #58

(06-23-2016 09:30 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  The Bible is fucking violent. The old testament is story after story of people hacking each other to death and don't tell me "that's not applicable because it's the old testament" because both have been taught in Sunday school since 313AD.

I agree, no one here is denying that the Bible is violent. But in your post lies the answer to where you're wrong. You're equating stories and anecdotes of other people hacking and stoning each other to death, with explicit commands given by God to hack and stone everyone else to death. That's the difference between the Bible and the Koran.

Post: #59

(06-23-2016 09:30 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  The Bible is fucking violent. The old testament is story after story of people hacking each other to death and don't tell me "that's not applicable because it's the old testament" because both have been taught in Sunday school since 313AD.

Another reason why Christianity is more insidious a threat than Islam is that it isn't honest.

The Old Testament is about God vs. the "other Gods". Anyone with cursory understanding of it realizes this. Battles were specific and commands were specific because of this fact. God gave up his own people to slavery and war losses when they ceased to be in covenant with him (rebel). That's how the world worked, BACK THEN.

Islam doesn't teach, nor has it ever, such a temporal and specific understanding of events. From the beginning, because it is an expansionist warring religion, it has always taught that it is above all others and it (quranic teachings) is immutable and unchangeable in "heaven" for all people, at all times. That's why you must follow the islamic prophet, his actions and examples and thus Shari'a.

---

Christianity is a threat?

What world are you living in? That's just weird. Look around. Islam is based on its founder, who was demon possessed, warring, polygamous, obsessed with worldly things and conquering, etc.

Jesus Christ is precisely the opposite. Literally in every way.

Post: #60

(06-23-2016 09:30 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  @ Hydronian. The GDP disparity (and subsequent reversion since around 1978) isn't some PC bullshit I made up brah, nor is it a helpful SJW talking point. It illustrates the negative affects of feminism and female consumerism on a world power quite nicely.

No offence to any of you, it's some interesting conversating.

I had to go and find your post that you were referring to, as I wasn't sure as to what you were speaking about. My post was more or less a specific response to another member.

However, having found your GDP post, I'll only comment that, while I acknowledge what you said about eliminating Islam, your general sentiment seems to be somewhat apologetic for them. I don't hold this against you, as empathy is is positive human trait in general.

However, this is the reality as far as I'm concerned:

Islam is a apocalyptic religion that believes subduing other populaces and in world conquest. Whether or not its mostly Arabic, Dravidian, Southeast Asian, and African believers are smart enough to acknowledge this and either divest themselves from it or acknowledge their culpability in its inherent violence through their support is beside the point. They are culpable and it is what I said it is. Though, I put the ultimate blame with the leaders and those who have always violently enforced Islam as a belief system.

One side always has its narrative. You cite a general sway of GDP output as justification. I don't find this to be credible reasoning for international terrorism. I'm unsure on what basis we are to have expected the GDP of the Near East to be anything above and beyond that of its petroleum production. It's never been able to be much else after the Arabs eradicated the original civilizations of Mesopotamia. Europe has never owed it economic parity. Its GDP issues, where they exist, are their own. Same with Africa. Same with everywhere else.

Post: #61

(06-23-2016 09:49 AM)Khan Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 09:30 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  The Bible is fucking violent. The old testament is story after story of people hacking each other to death and don't tell me "that's not applicable because it's the old testament" because both have been taught in Sunday school since 313AD.

I agree, no one here is denying that the Bible is violent. But in your post lies the answer to where you're wrong. You're equating stories and anecdotes of other people hacking and stoning each other to death, with explicit commands given by God to hack and stone everyone else to death. That's the difference between the Bible and the Koran.

My point is it doesn't matter.

Even in the absence of specific instructions, Christians have gone raping and pillaging around the globe just as much, if not more than anyone else.

Heck, that's even worse. History shows that Christians don't even need instructions, they'll just go attacking other religions for the fuck of it!

Christianity not giving an instruction to fuck people up doesn't do it any favors. Its congregation is in a somnambulant denial as the "values" of the bible are warped by the increasing female population that doesn't have the capacity to defend the essence of what made it so powerful in the past.

I'm guessing the advocacy for Christianity here is based more on maintaining a way of life and defending it to ourselves than any inherent quality found in the religion itself.

Today they actively neuter young men and set girls up to be whores. I don't see anything in this religion worth defending.

If you want to go into the weeds of the texts of the Koran and the bible we could probably trade evidences in favor of our points all day. What does it matter, though? Both religions suck for their respective congregations.

In the West, most of us just happen to have christian roots. Muslims, even peaceful ones, are a threat to the US because they can be easily used as a underground railroad for extremists whether they support them or not.

Is an imam at a local masque going to turn in a bunch of young men helping terrorists with some small smuggling operation to homeland security? Fuck no.

It's not nice, but they're a threat so fuck 'em. I'll be compassionate after I've conquered...christian style.

Post: #62

(06-23-2016 05:34 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 04:27 AM)hydrogonian Wrote:  ...
I like the sentiment but, if I may, communism is why we have political correctness and multiculturalism. It's the software that protects Islam, and as such it trumps it as a danger.
...

The cultural Marxism we suffer under in the West is not in the service of Communism. It is simply the utter rejection of everything that our nations were founded on, to be replaced with a vague and undefinable concept of "social justice".

Islam is gaining strength because nature abhors a vacuum, and a lack of cultural identity is a vacuum into which a raw, unsympathetic, unapologetic force like Islam will inevitably be drawn.

What we are entering into is not communism. Marxist methods for destroying capitalism are being used, yes, but not in the service of creating a communist society. What the elites have planned is something else entirely.

Social justice = socialism and the end goal of socialism is communism (as per Lenin).

Post: #63

(06-23-2016 10:09 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  My point is it doesn't matter.

Even in the absence of specific instructions, Christians have gone raping and pillaging around the globe just as much, if not more than anyone else.

But Muslims are going around raping and pillaging RIGHT NOW because of the SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS in Islam, and you seem to prefer their style. So are you saying that you don't like Christianity because it is "meek and flabby"?

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Heck, that's even worse. History shows that Christians don't even need instructions, they'll just go attacking other religions for the fuck of it!

Name a tribe of people that's innocent. Find me a people without sin before you cast stones at Christianity. Anyway, it doesn't sound like you have a problem with the sins of aggression, it seems that you have a problem with Christians not being aggressive enough for your taste. If that is the case, you should study history a bit better. Christians have a long fuse, but once its lit, we don't fuck around. We win. Jesus preached peace, but he was known to bust up a few benches now and then when circumstances called for action.

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Christianity not giving an instruction to fuck people up doesn't do it any favors.

Sounds like you would prefer a Christianity that gave instructions to fuck people up. Sounds like you prefer Islam. It may be a better fit for your worldview.

Your attitude towards Christianity is a lot like SJW attitudes towards Western civilization. You have a lot of criticisms but you're completely lacking viable solutions. Winston Churchill said that our system is the worst system there is... except for all the other ones that have been tried. Think on that.

Post: #64

(06-23-2016 10:44 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 10:09 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  My point is it doesn't matter.

Even in the absence of specific instructions, Christians have gone raping and pillaging around the globe just as much, if not more than anyone else.

But Muslims are going around raping and pillaging RIGHT NOW because of the SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS in Islam, and you seem to prefer their style. So are you saying that you don't like Christianity because it is "meek and flabby"?

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Heck, that's even worse. History shows that Christians don't even need instructions, they'll just go attacking other religions for the fuck of it!

Name a tribe of people that's innocent. Find me a people without sin before you cast stones at Christianity. Anyway, it doesn't sound like you have a problem with the sins of aggression, it seems that you have a problem with Christians not being aggressive enough for your taste. If that is the case, you should study history a bit better. Christians have a long fuse, but once its lit, we don't fuck around. We win. Jesus preached peace, but he was known to bust up a few benches now and then when circumstances called for action.

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Christianity not giving an instruction to fuck people up doesn't do it any favors.

Sounds like you would prefer a Christianity that gave instructions to fuck people up. Sounds like you prefer Islam. It may be a better fit for your worldview.

Your attitude towards Christianity is a lot like SJW attitudes towards Western civilization. You have a lot of criticisms but you're completely lacking viable solutions. Winston Churchill said that our system is the worst system there is... except for all the other ones that have been tried. Think on that.

Why are you making assumptions about me? If anything is SJWism it's attacking someone's personality because you don't like what they say.

Re-read my post, think about for more than five seconds, then suck my dick.

Post: #65

(06-23-2016 10:54 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 10:44 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 10:09 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  My point is it doesn't matter.

Even in the absence of specific instructions, Christians have gone raping and pillaging around the globe just as much, if not more than anyone else.

But Muslims are going around raping and pillaging RIGHT NOW because of the SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS in Islam, and you seem to prefer their style. So are you saying that you don't like Christianity because it is "meek and flabby"?

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Heck, that's even worse. History shows that Christians don't even need instructions, they'll just go attacking other religions for the fuck of it!

Name a tribe of people that's innocent. Find me a people without sin before you cast stones at Christianity. Anyway, it doesn't sound like you have a problem with the sins of aggression, it seems that you have a problem with Christians not being aggressive enough for your taste. If that is the case, you should study history a bit better. Christians have a long fuse, but once its lit, we don't fuck around. We win. Jesus preached peace, but he was known to bust up a few benches now and then when circumstances called for action.

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Christianity not giving an instruction to fuck people up doesn't do it any favors.

Sounds like you would prefer a Christianity that gave instructions to fuck people up. Sounds like you prefer Islam. It may be a better fit for your worldview.

Your attitude towards Christianity is a lot like SJW attitudes towards Western civilization. You have a lot of criticisms but you're completely lacking viable solutions. Winston Churchill said that our system is the worst system there is... except for all the other ones that have been tried. Think on that.

Why are you making assumptions about me? If anything is SJWism it's attacking someone's personality because you don't like what they say.

Re-read my post, think about for more than five seconds, then suck my dick.

Oops. Somebody's triggered! Take it easy man. I'm not trying to insult you, I'm trying to challenge your thinking. You've written off Christianity as wimpy because you haven't thought about the entire history of it for more than five seconds. You're drawing an equivalence between Christianity and Islam that is absurd. There is no equivalence. They are vastly different. Islam is cancer.

Post: #66

(06-23-2016 11:03 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 10:54 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 10:44 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 10:09 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  My point is it doesn't matter.

Even in the absence of specific instructions, Christians have gone raping and pillaging around the globe just as much, if not more than anyone else.

But Muslims are going around raping and pillaging RIGHT NOW because of the SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS in Islam, and you seem to prefer their style. So are you saying that you don't like Christianity because it is "meek and flabby"?

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Heck, that's even worse. History shows that Christians don't even need instructions, they'll just go attacking other religions for the fuck of it!

Name a tribe of people that's innocent. Find me a people without sin before you cast stones at Christianity. Anyway, it doesn't sound like you have a problem with the sins of aggression, it seems that you have a problem with Christians not being aggressive enough for your taste. If that is the case, you should study history a bit better. Christians have a long fuse, but once its lit, we don't fuck around. We win. Jesus preached peace, but he was known to bust up a few benches now and then when circumstances called for action.

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Christianity not giving an instruction to fuck people up doesn't do it any favors.

Sounds like you would prefer a Christianity that gave instructions to fuck people up. Sounds like you prefer Islam. It may be a better fit for your worldview.

Your attitude towards Christianity is a lot like SJW attitudes towards Western civilization. You have a lot of criticisms but you're completely lacking viable solutions. Winston Churchill said that our system is the worst system there is... except for all the other ones that have been tried. Think on that.

Why are you making assumptions about me? If anything is SJWism it's attacking someone's personality because you don't like what they say.

Re-read my post, think about for more than five seconds, then suck my dick.

Oops. Somebody's triggered! Take it easy man. I'm not trying to insult you, I'm trying to challenge your thinking. You've written off Christianity as wimpy because you haven't thought about the entire history of it for more than five seconds. You're drawing an equivalence between Christianity and Islam that is absurd. There is no equivalence. They are vastly different. Islam is cancer.

Again with the feminine, passive-aggressive bullshit.

Your response to my post implied that I'm uninformed, and lacking in viable solutions yet you yourself have simply stated a myopic viewpoint without submitting any reasoning.

Why is Islam cancer? How are these religions different? Make some points instead of suggesting I'm incapable of arguing mine.

It's not "challenging my thinking" to say I shouldn't criticize a religion just because all religions are flawed nor is it absurd to point out parallels between Islam and Christianity (the only one I pointed out was that they both have a violent history, other than that I'm saying they are different).

And saying "suck my dick" isn't "being triggered", numb-nuts. Grab a thicker skin.

Post: #67

(06-23-2016 11:14 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 11:03 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 10:54 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 10:44 AM)Ghost Tiger Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 10:09 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  My point is it doesn't matter.

Even in the absence of specific instructions, Christians have gone raping and pillaging around the globe just as much, if not more than anyone else.

But Muslims are going around raping and pillaging RIGHT NOW because of the SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS in Islam, and you seem to prefer their style. So are you saying that you don't like Christianity because it is "meek and flabby"?

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Heck, that's even worse. History shows that Christians don't even need instructions, they'll just go attacking other religions for the fuck of it!

Name a tribe of people that's innocent. Find me a people without sin before you cast stones at Christianity. Anyway, it doesn't sound like you have a problem with the sins of aggression, it seems that you have a problem with Christians not being aggressive enough for your taste. If that is the case, you should study history a bit better. Christians have a long fuse, but once its lit, we don't fuck around. We win. Jesus preached peace, but he was known to bust up a few benches now and then when circumstances called for action.

h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:Christianity not giving an instruction to fuck people up doesn't do it any favors.

Sounds like you would prefer a Christianity that gave instructions to fuck people up. Sounds like you prefer Islam. It may be a better fit for your worldview.

Your attitude towards Christianity is a lot like SJW attitudes towards Western civilization. You have a lot of criticisms but you're completely lacking viable solutions. Winston Churchill said that our system is the worst system there is... except for all the other ones that have been tried. Think on that.

Why are you making assumptions about me? If anything is SJWism it's attacking someone's personality because you don't like what they say.

Re-read my post, think about for more than five seconds, then suck my dick.

Oops. Somebody's triggered! Take it easy man. I'm not trying to insult you, I'm trying to challenge your thinking. You've written off Christianity as wimpy because you haven't thought about the entire history of it for more than five seconds. You're drawing an equivalence between Christianity and Islam that is absurd. There is no equivalence. They are vastly different. Islam is cancer.

Again with the feminine, passive-aggressive bullshit.

Your response to my post implied that I'm uninformed, and lacking in viable solutions yet you yourself have simply stated a myopic viewpoint without submitting any reasoning.

Why is Islam cancer? How are these religions different? Make some points instead of suggesting I'm incapable of arguing mine.

It's not "challenging my thinking" to say I shouldn't criticize a religion just because all religions are flawed nor is it absurd to point out parallels between Islam and Christianity (the only one I pointed out was that they both have a violent history, other than that I'm saying they are different).

And saying "suck my dick" isn't "being triggered", numb-nuts. Grab a thicker skin.

I've already made the points so it's your lack of interest in reading through past posts that's the issue here, which is ironic for someone who complains about me "only taking 5 seconds" to read his post. Put some effort into the discussion. You get out what you put in. And with respect to grabbing a thicker skin, you're the one hurling the insults darling. Physician, heal thyself.

Post: #68

So how is our newest bimonthly Islam thread going?

Post: #69

(06-23-2016 11:47 AM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  So how is our newest bimonthly Islam thread going?

I think we can group all Islam discussion under two categories, those that want to nuke them and those who don't. I, for one, am on TEAM GLASS PARKING LOT.

Post: #70

Did you call me darling??

Milo, is that you?

Post: #71

(06-23-2016 12:10 PM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  Did you call me darling??

Milo, is that you?

Well, I have been called worse things by better people.

Post: #72

(06-23-2016 11:51 AM)MiscBrah Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 11:47 AM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  So how is our newest bimonthly Islam thread going?

I think we can group all Islam discussion under two categories, those that want to nuke them and those who don't. I, for one, am on TEAM GLASS PARKING LOT.

Me too, start with that stupid fucking rock they worship in Mecca.

Post: #73

(06-23-2016 02:28 PM)godfather dust Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 11:51 AM)MiscBrah Wrote:  

(06-23-2016 11:47 AM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  So how is our newest bimonthly Islam thread going?

I think we can group all Islam discussion under two categories, those that want to nuke them and those who don't. I, for one, am on TEAM GLASS PARKING LOT.

Me too, start with that stupid fucking rock they worship in Mecca.

Maybe something hilarious like a pork air strike and bombing/ gun attack at the big rock?

Post: #74

(06-23-2016 10:09 AM)h3ltrsk3ltr Wrote:  My point is it doesn't matter.

Even in the absence of specific instructions, Christians have gone raping and pillaging around the globe just as much, if not more than anyone else.

Heck, that's even worse. History shows that Christians don't even need instructions, they'll just go attacking other religions for the fuck of it!

Nah man, that means the Christians who raped and pillaged did so not because they were Christians, but because they were bad dudes. It's not Christianity and its doctrines that are responsible for the atrocity, it's the all-too-human flaws (as well as superior military power) of some who call themselves Christians. Violent Christians are violent despite of Christian doctrine, not because of it.

On the other hand Islamic terrorism is a direct result of Islamic doctrines. The Koran is much more directly responsible for the war and atrocity committed by Islamic imperialists than Bible was for crime committed under its name. GDP disparity is not exclusively a Middle East problem. Many other regions also have it. South Asia, South East Asia, Latin America, Africa, etc. But international terrorism is almost exclusively an Islamic problem. This means Islamic doctrines and specific instructions have an active, negative influence, and not that economically disadvantaged dudes are just gonna do terrorism regardless of doctrines. If most Muslims are peaceful, they are peaceful despite of it rather than because of it.

This distinction in doctrines and specific instructions between the Bibble and the Koran, and their implications, must be addressed, not ignored and swept under the rug.


Hence, the claim that Christianity and Islam are equivalent is at best unfounded.

Post: #75

Communism is political ideology, where Islam is the combined of political and religious ideology, which one has the firepower to achieve their objective? isn't that obvious?