Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 19 Jun '16 17:17
    Amidst all the empty semantics, I offer this definition for your comments. Radical Islam refers to that group within the religion that believes that infidels can ('should'?) be killed. Elimination of non-believers is the goal.

    I think this group should be specifically singled out and considered as incompatible with my values and maybe yours.
  2. 20 Jun '16 03:09
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    Amidst all the empty semantics, I offer this definition for your comments. Radical Islam refers to that group within the religion that believes that infidels can ('should'?) be killed. Elimination of non-believers is the goal.

    I think this group should be specifically singled out and considered as incompatible with my values and maybe yours.
    Bigoted racist!

    They are really freedom fighters trying to free themselves from white male oppression. The white devils must be defeated!
  3. 22 Jun '16 22:35
    Originally posted by whodey
    Bigoted racist!

    They are really freedom fighters trying to free themselves from white male oppression. The white devils must be defeated!
    That will never happen, Remember the Christian Crusades.
    They'll get fed up and mass exterminate the lot of them.
  4. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    22 Jun '16 23:17
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    Amidst all the empty semantics, I offer this definition for your comments. Radical Islam refers to that group within the religion that believes that infidels can ('should'?) be killed. Elimination of non-believers is the goal.

    I think this group should be specifically singled out and considered as incompatible with my values and maybe yours.
    I think that if they set out to kill those who disagree with them, and if you disagree with them, then you may find their values incompatible with your values. This brings us .. to what?
  5. 23 Jun '16 01:53
    Originally posted by SERGEANTPMAIN
    That will never happen, Remember the Christian Crusades.
    They'll get fed up and mass exterminate the lot of them.
    Bigoted racist!

    They are really freedom fighters trying to free themselves from white male oppression. The white devils must be defeated!
  6. 23 Jun '16 02:52
    Originally posted by finnegan
    I think that if they set out to kill those who disagree with them, and if you disagree with them, then you may find their values incompatible with your values. This brings us .. to what?
    War.
  7. 23 Jun '16 08:36
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    Amidst all the empty semantics, I offer this definition for your comments. Radical Islam refers to that group within the religion that believes that infidels can ('should'?) be killed. Elimination of non-believers is the goal.

    I think this group should be specifically singled out and considered as incompatible with my values and maybe yours.
    do you call westboro baptist church radical christians? or the kkk? how about the nutter who shot up planned parenthood.

    if you find it somewhat awkward, realize that maybe muslims who do not blow stuff up might feel uncomfortable too hearing their religion constantly used, even with "radical" attached to it.
  8. 23 Jun '16 11:59
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    do you call westboro baptist church radical christians? or the kkk? how about the nutter who shot up planned parenthood.

    if you find it somewhat awkward, realize that maybe muslims who do not blow stuff up might feel uncomfortable too hearing their religion constantly used, even with "radical" attached to it.
    If I find WHAT awkward?
  9. 23 Jun '16 12:05
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    If I find WHAT awkward?
    do you call the kkk radical christians?
  10. 23 Jun '16 12:19
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    do you call the kkk radical christians?
    Did no one ever tell you not to answer a question with a question?
    This isn't awkward at all. There are and always have been radical christians, including the klan and the crusaders. What is your POINT!?
    Is it, please tell me no, that the islamists who don't kill might have their feelings hurt?
  11. 23 Jun '16 12:28
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    Did no one ever tell you not to answer a question with a question?
    This isn't awkward at all. There are and always have been radical christians, including the klan and the crusaders. What is your POINT!?
    Is it, please tell me no, that the islamists who don't kill might have their feelings hurt?
    you didn't understand my post, so i took it from the top.

    do you call the kkk radical christians? does the media? does anyone?

    "Is it, please tell me no, that the islamists who don't kill might have their feelings hurt?"
    it seems you did get where i am going. yes, constantly shouting radical islam offends muslims who are adamant that the terrorists are not real muslims.
  12. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    23 Jun '16 12:42
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    War.
    Well you have thought that through pretty thoroughly then.

    Should democrats now go to war against Thomas Mair, the killer of Jo Cox, and the white racists and islamaphobes who inspired him? Where should we target our bombs do you think? Would you give priority to the air force or the navy in your war against Islamaphobia and racism in Yorkshire? Or just close down all the churches? I suppose human rights would have to be got rid of for starters, don't you agree? You know what causes war - I think it must be all those refugees who cause war. Surely that is right.

    Yep. War on terror. That's the solution we have been overlooking all this time. A bit like war on drugs. Designed to fail.
  13. 23 Jun '16 13:04
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    you didn't understand my post, so i took it from the top.

    do you call the kkk radical christians? does the media? does anyone?

    "Is it, please tell me no, that the islamists who don't kill might have their feelings hurt?"
    it seems you did get where i am going. yes, constantly shouting radical islam offends muslims who are adamant that the terrorists are not real muslims.
    Once upon a time, long, long ago, liberals understood that free speech was intended to serve the truth and that it might offend some people and that was not necessarily a bad thing. No more.
    "yes, constantly shouting radical islam offends muslims who are adamant that the terrorists are not real muslims."

    They can get as adamant as they choose to - that's their right - but its not their place to throw their historical co-religionists out. They should instead get their heads out of the sand.
    The question about killing infidels goes all the way back to the death of Mohammed and their whistling past the graveyard does not change anything. It certainly does not help their
    admittedly difficult position.
    In any case, I'm not shouting. I think I'm calling a spade, a spade. It seems quite simple. It's not my purpose to give offense but if that's the case it doesn't change my mind.
  14. 23 Jun '16 13:12
    Originally posted by finnegan
    Well you have thought that through pretty thoroughly then.

    Should democrats now go to war against Thomas Mair, the killer of Jo Cox, and the white racists and islamaphobes who inspired him? Where should we target our bombs do you think? Would you give priority to the air force or the navy in your war against Islamaphobia and racism in Yorkshire? Or j ...[text shortened]... the solution we have been overlooking all this time. A bit like war on drugs. Designed to fail.
    I just answered your question. I'm an infidel. From your posts you sound like an infidel. Forgive me if I got that wrong. After all I don't know you. That's too bad maybe, as I find a hyperbolic sense of irony amusing.
    Assuming you're an infidel and therein a legitimate target, what would convince you that that's not a state of peace? Admittedly a theoretical question...
  15. 23 Jun '16 13:30
    Originally posted by stevemcc
    Once upon a time, long, long ago, liberals understood that free speech was intended to serve the truth and that it might offend some people and that was not necessarily a bad thing. No more.
    "yes, constantly shouting radical islam offends muslims who are adamant that the terrorists are not real muslims."

    They can get as adamant as they choose to - that ...[text shortened]... te simple. It's not my purpose to give offense but if that's the case it doesn't change my mind.
    "Once upon a time, long, long ago, liberals understood that free speech was intended to serve the truth and that it might offend some people and that was not necessarily a bad thing."
    oh, as long as you agree it might be offensive to some people, i don't need to discuss it any more.

    free speech should allow you to say crass things that offer no benefit to anyone, quite the opposite actually

    calling this "radical islam" offers no benefit, just like obama said. not offending potential allies, assuring them you are absolutely not against them and their religion but against terrorists does help.

    "I think I'm calling a spade, a spade"
    if you go to a friend's house, would you call their baby ugly if it is a particularly ugly baby? what would it be to gain? would he respect you more?