Originally posted by Grampy Bobby "... go pound sand." lol One of my wife Evelyn's favorite expressions when someone would try to talk nonsense and/or bs.
Are you afraid of stating a clear and unequivocal stance on freedom of speech?
Originally posted by Suzianne I would amend those two things to something vastly more important:
1. Love the Lord God with all your heart.
2. Love your neighbor as yourself.
All else follows from these.
Point 1 seems more generalized and not really in sync with the thread, but whatever.
As always my ideas of "God" and your ideas of "God" seem vastly different. So different that I doubt we could even meet each other half way, although I would try naturally.
Point 2 I can agree with more or less and believe that I already have embraced this point and put it into action in my life.
"Piss Christ is a 1987 photograph by the American artist and photographer Andres Serrano. It depicts a small plastic crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist's urine. The piece was a winner of the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art's "Awards in the Visual Arts" competition, which was sponsored in part by the National Endowment fo ...[text shortened]... t, generally. I guess there always might be a wacko or two out there, but this is not the norm.
As was said earlier, Christians might get upset over blasphemy, but not enough to kill over it, generally. I guess there always might be a wacko or two out there, but this is not the norm.
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby "... go pound sand." lol One of my wife Evelyn's favorite expressions when someone would try to talk nonsense and/or bs.
While Great King Rat and I disagree on one aspect of this issue (while agreeing about the core principle in question ), I certainly don't think he is talking "nonsense and/or bs". If you think he is, why not explain why?
Originally posted by Great King Rat From wikipedia:
In 1982, soon after a terrorist attack had taken place on Jews in Paris, Siné gave an interview on the radio during which he stated: "Yes, I am anti-Semitic and I am not scared to admit it [...] I want all Jews to live in fear, unless they are pro-Palestinian. Let them die." He later apologised for his comments.
"Call for extermination" would probably be somewhat of an exaggeration.
Charlie Hebdo fired him 26 years after he made this comment.
Originally posted by FMF Charlie Hebdo fired him 26 years after he made this comment.
He was an outspoken anti-Semitic which may have played a role in the conflict between him and his employer escalating. It is not clear to me if the only reason he was fired was the "He's gonna go far" line, or if there was more to it. The court ruled in his favor which means the employer was wrong in firing him.
As was said earlier, Christians might get upset over blasphemy, but not enough to kill over it, generally. I guess there always might be a wacko or two out there, but this is not the norm.
I think that's the case with Muslims as well.
I have to respectfully disagree, Islam has blasphemy laws which are capital offences. The very nature of Islam and its insistence on learning the Koran in Arabic has resulted in generations of children being able to read the words with little understanding. What this means is that religious leaders are very powerful and can incite the uneducated to acts of violence. Thats why so much violence is carried out after Friday Mosque.
I must point out that Islam justifies war where the Christian in his or her Holy writings has no real justification. Both Judaism and Islam have no concept of forgiveness in the Christian sense and that is why retribution is so often sought.
Granted that many moderate Muslims will not engage in murder but a pretext exists for them to be able to justify acts of violence. There is no such moral imperative for those who wish to follow the teachings of the Christ. That Nominal Christians have often engaged in wars against each other does not negate this, it simply means they have abandoned Christs teachings and sought justification from some other source, usually political.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie I have to respectfully disagree, Islam has blasphemy laws which are capital offences. The very nature of Islam and its insistence on learning the Koran in Arabic has resulted in generations of children being able to read the words with little understanding. What this means is that religious leaders are very powerful and can incite the uneducated to ...[text shortened]... ply means they have abandoned Christs teachings and sought justification from some other source.
Muslims might get upset over blasphemy, but not enough to kill over it, generally.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie Granted that many moderate Muslims will not engage in murder but a pretext exists for them to be able to justify acts of violence. There is no such such moral imperative for those who wish to follow the teachings of the Christ.
Are you really saying that moderate Muslims who do not engage in murder as a response to blasphemy are in some way ignoring a "moral imperative" according to their religion?
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby Originally posted by divegeester [b]"I feel deeply sorry for the those good spirited people who coincidentally have adopted the Islamic faith..."
Since when are human emotions or human good relevant to God's Plan of reconciliation? This is the result of human volition: An inaudible prayer to God the Father, expressing faith alone in Christ alone changes everything for time and eternity.[/b]
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Edit: oh I see it now, your having a go at me. Passively.
Originally posted by FMF Are you really saying that moderate Muslims who do not engage in murder as a response to blasphemy are in some way ignoring a "moral imperative" according to their religion?
What I have actually said to those capable of rational thought is that a moral imperative exists for any Muslim to act with violence in the case of blasphemy/apostasy against their religion because the Koran itself makes provision for it? That is not to say they will act upon it, merely that it exists. How you could fail to comprehend this, I have no idea.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie What I have actually said to those capable of rational thought is that a moral imperative exists for any Muslim to act with violence in the case of blasphemy/apostasy against their religion because the Koran itself makes provision for it? That is not to say they will act upon it, merely that it exists. How you could fail to comprehend this, I have no idea.
The people I live amongst feel no "moral imperative" to engage in murder. I think you are making a peculiar sweeping statement and ignoring the diversity there is within Islam.
Those that murder and commit other criminal acts may well see themselves as driven by a "moral imperative" ~ based on their theological interpretation ~ but there is no such "moral imperative" for moderate Muslims.
That would mean, in your perception of their religious beliefs, moderate Muslims not engaging in murder as a reaction to blasphemy would be "immoral" according to their own religious terms of reference. Gosh. You sound like a Fox TV pundit talking about the UK's Birmingham. 🙂
20 Jan '15 22:21
Charlie Hebdo
Back to Top