It is currently Mon Feb 24, 2025 2:15 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 571 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 9:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
denisdman wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:

It's a total copout to compare the lack of knowledge about the origin of the universe to the "leap of faith" in believing in a Christian stories/God. For Christianity to be "true" it would have to mean that God chose to reveal himself to only a certain part of the world, while condemning several generations in all of Asian, the Americas and Australia to eternal damnation. In the mean time you are also betting that your version of God is correct rather than the Islamic God, the Hindu Gods, or even if you chose the right sect of Christianity.

Believing that is quite a leap of faith, while the question of why is there life at all? We don't know, yet, but we are working on it.


I have struggled with both theories of evolution and Christian belief. I have a basis of knowledge for both with an undergrad degree in BioChem and having been raised Christian and spending lots of time reading up on the "historical" Jesus.

I don't have any answers that will sway you. Christian belief is not some pie in the sky theory and faith doesn't come out of no where. The death and resurrection of Jesus, along with the miracles he performed make a good case for Christ as the Son of God. Maybe it's all made up, and I certainly don't know. I can say that if you simply lived your life like Christ, you'd be a better person for it. I am not particularly religious, but I do have faith.

Evolution is a huge leap as well. There's lots of scientific evidence for evolution, and there are a ton of holes. It takes a big leap to believe we go from the big bang, to the creation of our solar system to amino acids eventually coming together until we move all the way to man kind.

I have even wondered if God put the universe in motion and used evolution as his manner of "development". Once man came into being through evolution, then maybe a lot of the Bible stories start to make sense. God didn't like where man was headed and sent his Son. I don't know.


What ton of holes in evolution are you talking about? Also, evolution is not the origin of the universe. There is science in evolution. The Bible is a collection of stories written down hundreds of years after the fact and these stories have plenty of contenders for other options, which do you think is more accurate based on that alone?

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 9:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93650
Location: To the left of my post
"Evolution is a huge leap as well" :lol:

I can't even imagine how you would then view the Bible saying the Earth is 6,000 years old.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
"Evolution is a huge leap as well" :lol:

I can't even imagine how you would then view the Bible saying the Earth is 6,000 years old.


The Bible does not provide any figures. The writers did not think of it at the time. A monk later added up the ages of Biblical characters- meaning that the Garden of Eden is literal truth. We all evolved from one inbred family.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:03 am 
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80562
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
long time guy wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
Nas wrote:
I think it's hard to get religion out of politics. Religion is what shapes a lot of people.


Yet, you think that it has nothing to do with Islamic terrorism? Terrorism is political.


Islamic Terrorists use religion just like other groups have used religion throughout history. Religion has been used to achieve social and political aims throughout history. There are too many examples to cite. Muslims do not have a monopoly on this sort of behavior either. The goals of Islamic Terrorists are political in nature. They target the United States because of our politics not our religion. It doesn't fit this neatly constructed narrative conveniently propagated by our officials however.


If it were about religion then the majority of terrorist attacks would not occur in the Middle East. Asian Muslims are not targeting the United States. There is a reason

Was Jim Jones a "Christian" or a "Terrorist"? What about Timothy McVeigh? David Koresh? KKK organization?


Jim Jones doesn't really support your argument of religion not having a role in terrorism. You have a terrible argument that you keep harping on over and over. Believing that you are going to a magical place because you killed in the name of Allah enables terrorists. That is a fact. Why are there not Latin American terrorists striking the US if politics is the sole cause of Islamic terrorism?


Koresh is a bad example too. All he did was fuck some underage girls and exercise his 2nd Amendment rights. He was nothing more than Jerry Lee Lewis on steroids and he was attacked by the U.S. government.

And stop mentioning the KKK. Not all KKK member have the same beliefs! #NotAllKlansmen

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33244
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:

What ton of holes in evolution are you talking about? Also, evolution is not the origin of the universe. There is science in evolution. The Bible is a collection of stories written down hundreds of years after the fact and these stories have plenty of contenders for other options, which do you think is more accurate based on that alone?


Mark was written in 60 AD, if memory serves less than 30 years after the fact.

Holes in evolution:
-Show me the progression from amino acids and single cell organisms to humans. No holes.
-If completely new species can be created from others, when in human history have we ever observed a unique specie come into being? Meaning, how come we have extinction which has been observed but not totally new creation.
-Why are there only homo sapiens and not any of the precursors? Meaning, we think we evolved from lower species, but why do all prior species disappear in every case. Shouldn't some have survived especially in areas of the world where they were separated? Now if you can show me the link(s) from apes to humans, then I would believe we have some precursors.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
long time guy wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
Nas wrote:
I think it's hard to get religion out of politics. Religion is what shapes a lot of people.


Yet, you think that it has nothing to do with Islamic terrorism? Terrorism is political.


Islamic Terrorists use religion just like other groups have used religion throughout history. Religion has been used to achieve social and political aims throughout history. There are too many examples to cite. Muslims do not have a monopoly on this sort of behavior either. The goals of Islamic Terrorists are political in nature. They target the United States because of our politics not our religion. It doesn't fit this neatly constructed narrative conveniently propagated by our officials however.


If it were about religion then the majority of terrorist attacks would not occur in the Middle East. Asian Muslims are not targeting the United States. There is a reason

Was Jim Jones a "Christian" or a "Terrorist"? What about Timothy McVeigh? David Koresh? KKK organization?


Jim Jones doesn't really support your argument of religion not having a role in terrorism. You have a terrible argument that you keep harping on over and over. Believing that you are going to a magical place because you killed in the name of Allah enables terrorists. That is a fact. Why are there not Latin American terrorists striking the US if politics is the sole cause of Islamic terrorism?


Koresh is a bad example too. All he did was fuck some underage girls and exercise his 2nd Amendment rights. He was nothing more than Jerry Lee Lewis on steroids and he was attacked by the U.S. government.

And stop mentioning the KKK. Not all KKK member have the same beliefs! #NotAllKlansmen


Neither do all Muslims yet we can excuse the behavior of the klan but we condemn Muslims. My point is that the Klan committed acts of violence and terror yet whole wearing a cross on their chest. This country never associated their beliefs with Christianity though. That same philosophy must be applied to Islam if we are going to move forward.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
long time guy wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
Nas wrote:
I think it's hard to get religion out of politics. Religion is what shapes a lot of people.


Yet, you think that it has nothing to do with Islamic terrorism? Terrorism is political.


Islamic Terrorists use religion just like other groups have used religion throughout history. Religion has been used to achieve social and political aims throughout history. There are too many examples to cite. Muslims do not have a monopoly on this sort of behavior either. The goals of Islamic Terrorists are political in nature. They target the United States because of our politics not our religion. It doesn't fit this neatly constructed narrative conveniently propagated by our officials however.


If it were about religion then the majority of terrorist attacks would not occur in the Middle East. Asian Muslims are not targeting the United States. There is a reason

Was Jim Jones a "Christian" or a "Terrorist"? What about Timothy McVeigh? David Koresh? KKK organization?


Jim Jones doesn't really support your argument of religion not having a role in terrorism. You have a terrible argument that you keep harping on over and over. Believing that you are going to a magical place because you killed in the name of Allah enables terrorists. That is a fact. Why are there not Latin American terrorists striking the US if politics is the sole cause of Islamic terrorism?


The Latin American argument really doesn't make much sense. I don't know what you are getting at with that. If it isn't about politics then why aren't Indonesians targeting the U.S? The history doesn't support what you are saying at all. There are theories and there are facts.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93650
Location: To the left of my post
denisdman wrote:
-Show me the progression from amino acids and single cell organisms to humans. No holes.
This is not a hole. We didn't observe the formation of the Earth either. We still know how it happened.
denisdman wrote:
-If completely new species can be created from others, when in human history have we ever observed a unique specie come into being? Meaning, how come we have extinction which has been observed but not totally new creation.
The concept of a species is somewhat imperfect. We have witnessed evolution happen(like the moths in pollution filled Britain). We can track the fossil record and correlate it to things like major climate changes and world changing events. The reason we don't have video evidence of evolution is because video evidence is a fairly new thing and evolution, like many things, are long term processes.
denisdman wrote:
-Why are there only homo sapiens and not any of the precursors? Meaning, we think we evolved from lower species, but why do all prior species disappear in every case. Shouldn't some have survived especially in areas of the world where they were separated? Now if you can show me the link(s) from apes to humans, then I would believe we have some precursors.
It's because we won though there also is evidence we may have pretty much just assimilated some of them too as we were dominating them.

The things that homo sapiens could do put them at such an advantage to every other species both of our ancestors and other animals that it seems fairly obvious why the other ones didn't thrive. It would be like asking why the Indians that had settled Chicago first are no longer there.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
long time guy wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
long time guy wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
Nas wrote:
I think it's hard to get religion out of politics. Religion is what shapes a lot of people.


Yet, you think that it has nothing to do with Islamic terrorism? Terrorism is political.


Islamic Terrorists use religion just like other groups have used religion throughout history. Religion has been used to achieve social and political aims throughout history. There are too many examples to cite. Muslims do not have a monopoly on this sort of behavior either. The goals of Islamic Terrorists are political in nature. They target the United States because of our politics not our religion. It doesn't fit this neatly constructed narrative conveniently propagated by our officials however.


If it were about religion then the majority of terrorist attacks would not occur in the Middle East. Asian Muslims are not targeting the United States. There is a reason

Was Jim Jones a "Christian" or a "Terrorist"? What about Timothy McVeigh? David Koresh? KKK organization?


Jim Jones doesn't really support your argument of religion not having a role in terrorism. You have a terrible argument that you keep harping on over and over. Believing that you are going to a magical place because you killed in the name of Allah enables terrorists. That is a fact. Why are there not Latin American terrorists striking the US if politics is the sole cause of Islamic terrorism?


The Latin American argument really doesn't make much sense. I don't know what you are getting at with that. If it isn't about politics then why aren't Indonesians targeting the U.S? The history doesn't support what you are saying at all. There are theories and there are facts.


It makes perfect sense. The US has messed with Latin American for years. I do not see Latin Americans flying planes into towers over it. Yet, Muslims are doing it for the same reason that you cite-U.S. military interventions and policy. Do you know for a fact that no Muslim from Indonesian has been involved in terrorism? Seems like a pretty terrible bet. Terrorists are usually not taking orders from a government anyway. Islamic terrorists are taking their orders from a leader of a gang that sees themselves as warrior for Allah.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Last edited by WaitingforRuffcorn on Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
long time guy wrote:
Neither do all Muslims yet we can excuse the behavior of the klan but we condemn Muslims. My point is that the Klan committed acts of violence and terror yet whole wearing a cross on their chest. This country never associated their beliefs with Christianity though. That same philosophy must be applied to Islam if we are going to move forward.


The country did associate their beliefs with Christianity at a time when racism was open. See the film Birth of a Nation. Since then they have been marginalized to a fringe group of losers, who are not committing acts of terrorism because otherwise they would be arrested. Terrorist camps are tolerated in many Muslim countries because those are Allah's soldiers.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:13 am
Posts: 17583
Location: BLM Lake Forest Chapter
pizza_Place: Quonset
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:


It makes perfect sense. The US has messed with Latin American for years. I do not see Latin Americans flying planes into towers over it. Yet, Muslims are doing it for the same reason that you cite-U.S. military interventions and policy. Do you know for a fact that no Muslim from Indonesian has been involved in terrorism? Seems like a pretty terrible bet. Terrorists are usually not taking orders from a government anyway. Islamic terrorists are taking their orders from a leader of a gang that seems themselves as warrior for Allah.



Another truly dizzying intellect...

_________________
Don Tiny wrote:
Don't be such a fucking chump.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:28 am 
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80562
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
long time guy wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:

And stop mentioning the KKK. Not all KKK member have the same beliefs! #NotAllKlansmen


Neither do all Muslims yet we can excuse the behavior of the klan but we condemn Muslims.


I think you missed my point.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:29 am 
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80562
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
GoldenJet wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:


It makes perfect sense. The US has messed with Latin American for years. I do not see Latin Americans flying planes into towers over it. Yet, Muslims are doing it for the same reason that you cite-U.S. military interventions and policy. Do you know for a fact that no Muslim from Indonesian has been involved in terrorism? Seems like a pretty terrible bet. Terrorists are usually not taking orders from a government anyway. Islamic terrorists are taking their orders from a leader of a gang that seems themselves as warrior for Allah.



Another truly dizzying intellect...


Do you really not see that there is a direct connection between Islamic doctrine and suicide bombing?

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
GoldenJet wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:


It makes perfect sense. The US has messed with Latin American for years. I do not see Latin Americans flying planes into towers over it. Yet, Muslims are doing it for the same reason that you cite-U.S. military interventions and policy. Do you know for a fact that no Muslim from Indonesian has been involved in terrorism? Seems like a pretty terrible bet. Terrorists are usually not taking orders from a government anyway. Islamic terrorists are taking their orders from a leader of a gang that seems themselves as warrior for Allah.



Another truly dizzying intellect...


Another valuable contribution.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:13 am
Posts: 17583
Location: BLM Lake Forest Chapter
pizza_Place: Quonset
JORR

You believe that all Muslims have exactly the same beliefs...or what would be the point of identifying as Muslim...Yes?

I would argue that the majority of Muslims, like the majority of Christians, are more concerned with everyday life and just getting by than they are with living a completely devout life to the letter of their prospective "good book".

Like most Christians tend to be of the "C&E" variety, most Muslims are likely "only at Ramadan" types.

_________________
Don Tiny wrote:
Don't be such a fucking chump.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:38 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:10 am
Posts: 42094
Location: Rock Ridge (splendid!)
pizza_Place: Charlie Fox's / Paisano's
Image

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93650
Location: To the left of my post
GoldenJet wrote:
JORR

You believe that all Muslims have exactly the same beliefs...or what would be the point of identifying as Muslim...Yes?

I would argue that the majority of Muslims, like the majority of Christians, are more concerned with everyday life and just getting by than they are with living a completely devout life to the letter of their prospective "good book".

Like most Christians tend to be of the "C&E" variety, most Muslims are likely "only at Ramadan" types.
This is easily refuted by places like Saudi Arabia though where the Muslims that are not really interested in just getting by.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:45 am 
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80562
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
GoldenJet wrote:
JORR

You believe that all Muslims have exactly the same beliefs...or what would be the point of identifying as Muslim...Yes?

I would argue that the majority of Muslims, like the majority of Christians, are more concerned with everyday life and just getting by than they are with living a completely devout life to the letter of their prospective "good book".

Like most Christians tend to be of the "C&E" variety, most Muslims are likely "only at Ramadan" types.



I don't believe that all Muslims have the exact same beliefs, but I do believe there are certain critical beliefs that one must hold to be considered a Muslim (or a Christian). For example, you can't really be a Christian if you don't believe Jesus was the Son of God. That's the entire basis for being a Christian.

I've never said there aren't people who may be Muslim in the same way I am a Catholic. But when push comes to shove your beliefs have to come from somewhere. That's why I would never actually claim to be a Catholic.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:13 am
Posts: 17583
Location: BLM Lake Forest Chapter
pizza_Place: Quonset
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
GoldenJet wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:


It makes perfect sense. The US has messed with Latin American for years. I do not see Latin Americans flying planes into towers over it. Yet, Muslims are doing it for the same reason that you cite-U.S. military interventions and policy. Do you know for a fact that no Muslim from Indonesian has been involved in terrorism? Seems like a pretty terrible bet. Terrorists are usually not taking orders from a government anyway. Islamic terrorists are taking their orders from a leader of a gang that seems themselves as warrior for Allah.



Another truly dizzying intellect...


Do you really not see that there is a direct connection between Islamic doctrine and suicide bombing?


Of course. "In the name of Allah, I'm going to blow myself up and kill a bunch of you ___________! Because you came into our homeland and killed my/a friend's/a neighbor's family!" or Because you supported a regime that committed atrocities to my people.

I do think there are some really fucked up people out there who have manipulated others into committing horrible acts in the name of Allah. There are also just some horrible, fucked up people out there.

I don't think it's nearly as simple as "All Muslims believe it's ok to do "X" to non Muslims, because that's what the Koran says".

I do think that by taking on the mantle of "World Policeman" we will take a certain amount of push back from people who don't want us fucking with their little shithole parts of the world. I also think it's completely myopic and ignorant to not think our "interests" are anything but aligned with global business. If we were just concerned with stamping out atrocious people, we'd have done a lot more in Africa, up to now.

_________________
Don Tiny wrote:
Don't be such a fucking chump.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 10:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2015 9:13 am
Posts: 17583
Location: BLM Lake Forest Chapter
pizza_Place: Quonset
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
GoldenJet wrote:
JORR

You believe that all Muslims have exactly the same beliefs...or what would be the point of identifying as Muslim...Yes?

I would argue that the majority of Muslims, like the majority of Christians, are more concerned with everyday life and just getting by than they are with living a completely devout life to the letter of their prospective "good book".

Like most Christians tend to be of the "C&E" variety, most Muslims are likely "only at Ramadan" types.



I don't believe that all Muslims have the exact same beliefs, but I do believe there are certain critical beliefs that one must hold to be considered a Muslim (or a Christian). For example, you can't really be a Christian if you don't believe Jesus was the Son of God. That's the entire basis for being a Christian.

I've never said there aren't people who may be Muslim in the same way I am a Catholic. But when push comes to shove your beliefs have to come from somewhere. That's why I would never actually claim to be a Catholic.


So, you have determined that the "critical beliefs" one must hold to be considered a muslim contain the belief that suicide bombers are "ok in my book"?

_________________
Don Tiny wrote:
Don't be such a fucking chump.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19525
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
GoldenJet wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
GoldenJet wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:


It makes perfect sense. The US has messed with Latin American for years. I do not see Latin Americans flying planes into towers over it. Yet, Muslims are doing it for the same reason that you cite-U.S. military interventions and policy. Do you know for a fact that no Muslim from Indonesian has been involved in terrorism? Seems like a pretty terrible bet. Terrorists are usually not taking orders from a government anyway. Islamic terrorists are taking their orders from a leader of a gang that seems themselves as warrior for Allah.



Another truly dizzying intellect...


Do you really not see that there is a direct connection between Islamic doctrine and suicide bombing?


Of course. "In the name of Allah, I'm going to blow myself up and kill a bunch of you ___________! Because you came into our homeland and killed my/a friend's/a neighbor's family!" or Because you supported a regime that committed atrocities to my people.

I do think there are some really fucked up people out there who have manipulated others into committing horrible acts in the name of Allah. There are also just some horrible, fucked up people out there.

I don't think it's nearly as simple as "All Muslims believe it's ok to do "X" to non Muslims, because that's what the Koran says".

I do think that by taking on the mantle of "World Policeman" we will take a certain amount of push back from people who don't want us fucking with their little shithole parts of the world. I also think it's completely myopic and ignorant to not think our "interests" are anything but aligned with global business. If we were just concerned with stamping out atrocious people, we'd have done a lot more in Africa, up to now.


No one said all Muslims think that. Just saying that Islam is a major factor in producing Islamic terrorists because Islamic teachings commend fighting for Allah. Doesn't seem like too much of a stretch.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2016 10:39 am
Posts: 1493
pizza_Place: Aurelio's
denisdman wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:

What ton of holes in evolution are you talking about? Also, evolution is not the origin of the universe. There is science in evolution. The Bible is a collection of stories written down hundreds of years after the fact and these stories have plenty of contenders for other options, which do you think is more accurate based on that alone?


Mark was written in 60 AD, if memory serves less than 30 years after the fact.

Holes in evolution:
-Show me the progression from amino acids and single cell organisms to humans. No holes.
-If completely new species can be created from others, when in human history have we ever observed a unique specie come into being? Meaning, how come we have extinction which has been observed but not totally new creation.
-Why are there only homo sapiens and not any of the precursors? Meaning, we think we evolved from lower species, but why do all prior species disappear in every case. Shouldn't some have survived especially in areas of the world where they were separated? Now if you can show me the link(s) from apes to humans, then I would believe we have some precursors.


It's nice to say the world is a billion years old, but you cannot roll the dice right enough times to make even the proteins that are necessary for life. People like to say, "There are no absolutes," but of course that is an absolute statement. The problem with making evolution the god upon which the universe sits is that evolution does not provide any basis for meaning in life or for morality.

Christianity says that there is a moral law and because there is a moral law there is a moral lawgiver. Christianity points to the fact that humans are made in the image of God and because of that they have infinite worth and value and are fundamentally different than animals. Also Christianity teaches that the Creator of the world is a personal being revealed to be one being that is united in the persons of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. In order for there to be people who are personal beings you must begin with a personal God. Christianity teaches that man is separated from God on account of his choice to be his own god and that God has come in the form of a man to die in the place of a lost and sinful humanity. That is fundamentally different than all other religions where people are trying to earn their way to heaven. In Christianity God dies for the people and offers them eternal life for their faith in the sacrifice.

_________________
God is the uncaused cause of the universe. He had no beginning and has no end. He is not bound by the laws of the universe he created.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93650
Location: To the left of my post
Drake LaRrieta wrote:
It's nice to say the world is a billion years old, but you cannot roll the dice right enough times to make even the proteins that are necessary for life. People like to say, "There are no absolutes," but of course that is an absolute statement. The problem with making evolution the god upon which the universe sits is that evolution does not provide any basis for meaning in life or for morality.
What does this paragraph mean?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:15 am 
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80562
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
GoldenJet wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
GoldenJet wrote:
JORR

You believe that all Muslims have exactly the same beliefs...or what would be the point of identifying as Muslim...Yes?

I would argue that the majority of Muslims, like the majority of Christians, are more concerned with everyday life and just getting by than they are with living a completely devout life to the letter of their prospective "good book".

Like most Christians tend to be of the "C&E" variety, most Muslims are likely "only at Ramadan" types.



I don't believe that all Muslims have the exact same beliefs, but I do believe there are certain critical beliefs that one must hold to be considered a Muslim (or a Christian). For example, you can't really be a Christian if you don't believe Jesus was the Son of God. That's the entire basis for being a Christian.

I've never said there aren't people who may be Muslim in the same way I am a Catholic. But when push comes to shove your beliefs have to come from somewhere. That's why I would never actually claim to be a Catholic.


So, you have determined that the "critical beliefs" one must hold to be considered a muslim contain the belief that suicide bombers are "ok in my book"?


Come on. Of course I don't think suicide bombing is a core Muslim belief. But there are millions and millions of Muslims that find support for it in the doctrine.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:12 pm
Posts: 2865
pizza_Place: maciano's
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
I've never said there aren't people who may be Muslim in the same way I am a Catholic. But when push comes to shove your beliefs have to come from somewhere. That's why I would never actually claim to be a Catholic.


Just pointing out under shariah law you just committed a crime punishable by death in many countries.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 12:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:08 am
Posts: 14018
Location: Underneath the Grace of Timothy Richard Tebow
pizza_Place: ------
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Drake LaRrieta wrote:
It's nice to say the world is a billion years old, but you cannot roll the dice right enough times to make even the proteins that are necessary for life. People like to say, "There are no absolutes," but of course that is an absolute statement. The problem with making evolution the god upon which the universe sits is that evolution does not provide any basis for meaning in life or for morality.
What does this paragraph mean?

If a tree falls in the forest and hits a mime....does anyone care?

_________________
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rpb is wrong. Phil McCracken is useful.

Chus wrote:
RPB is right. You suck. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 12:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
GoldenJet wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:


It makes perfect sense. The US has messed with Latin American for years. I do not see Latin Americans flying planes into towers over it. Yet, Muslims are doing it for the same reason that you cite-U.S. military interventions and policy. Do you know for a fact that no Muslim from Indonesian has been involved in terrorism? Seems like a pretty terrible bet. Terrorists are usually not taking orders from a government anyway. Islamic terrorists are taking their orders from a leader of a gang that seems themselves as warrior for Allah.



Another truly dizzying intellect...


Another valuable contribution.


Jim Jones committed a terrorist act and cited passages from the Bible as justification for his act. Do the actions committed by Jim Jones serve to vilify all Christians? Does the fact that Jim Jones used the bible and cited god mean that Christianity is a murderous religion? Or is Jim Jones considered an outlier? Are his views considered to be that of a drug induced whack job or those typical of a follower of Christianity?

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 1:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33244
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
Hey Drake, it's no matter to me what anyone else here believes. I sure hope the Christians are right for all our sake. I can't reconcile the fact that I believe in evolution and Christianity at the same time. But anyone on earth that says he has the answers is just fooling himself as much as I am fooling myself.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 1:08 pm 
Online
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:00 am
Posts: 80562
Location: Rogers Park, USA
pizza_Place: JB Alberto's
denisdman wrote:
I sure hope the Christians are right for all our sake.


Why would you say that? The Christian god is mercurial. That motherfucker might change his mind at any moment and rip that New Covenant right in half and flood your ass right out of existence. Then you'd be regretting your statement and begging Seacrest to let you on his ark.

_________________
Freedom is our Strength.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Khan Controversy
PostPosted: Fri Aug 05, 2016 1:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:45 am
Posts: 16843
pizza_Place: Salerno's
well, there is that whole eternal life everlasting in heaven vs burning in hell for all eternity thing, if you believe.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 571 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group