I think it is obvious that Christianity has become mostly benign and secularized for the most part and I don't see Christians subjugating their women and executing gays in the ways that take place in the Islamic world due to the quran and Hadith (the Hadith is the so-called writings of the prophet and his followers in which Islamic Shariah law is based from); but I see too many atheists tending to bash Christianity and giving excuses for Islam. Why is this so when according to the Islamic faith, we atheists are "kafar" should be the first ones killed before the Christians and Jews (especially me, since I am an apostate since I was "born" a Muslim); therefore, why do atheists tend to give excuses for the true evils of the Islamic faith??


Jesus Christ as a symbol (whether he was a real person or not) is a much better role model than the child molesting, murderous, and evil "prophet" called Muhammad. The Bible doesn't demand governments to be Christian but the Quran demands that all governments be Islamic by nature and the punishments are much more bizarre. In Islam, you can not even ask any questions about Muhammad or Allah but Christians and Jews are able to debate within themselves and ask questions. When a cartoon is drawn or a quran is burnt you see how savagely Muslims act throughout the world and those who are "moderate" instead of condemning the barbaric acts blame the "Salman Rushdie's" or the "Pastor" instead of placing blame on the perpetrators and culture of violence in the Islamic world. So why is it, that Christianity is often (in my opinion) overly criticized and Islam is not criticized enough when the gravest threat to the existence of the human race is surely an Islamic regime with nuclear weapons?? I'd like to get your opinions..

Views: 3566

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I am not here to make friends. :) I am here to discuss issues; particularly issues of such vital importance as of this one.

And Ryan, when one claims that the Muslims don't take the Quran and Hadith seriously; and that Islamic oppression is due to western culture, there is no alternative than to attack such individuals positions and naivety ferociously.

Well, one of those two things is true, and it's not the part about discussing the issues. 


It seems as though you are here to verbally slam anyone who doesn't agree with you and then declare yourself the victor of a discussion (for which I didn't know a victor was possible) repeatedly only to come back and slam them over and over again. This is not limited to this discussion. I have noticed this behavior over several threads. It's become a trend. Forget about making friends, I don't even care to have discussions with you. I posted what I posted as a heads up that if your behavior continues, you'll find yourself posting to an empty thread sooner rather than later. It's not worth my time to continue this any further. Take my two cents or leave it, I don't care.


"there is no alternative to attack such individuals positions and naivety ferociously."

Aaaaand I rest my case. Can we make the three o'clock tea time, your honor?

Ryan, have you joined the long list of people on T|A that Sassan has labeled as "naive" yet?   
And yes, Jared does share a large burden of the responsibility for walking into a verbal battle guns blazing without knowing the foundations of what he's talking about.
I don't know of any democracy that doesn't reserve certain issues from the vicissitudes of the mob--such as religious freedom.  You sound like an American Fundie defending theocracy in the U.S.

If muslims become a majority, and that majority collectively votes in the West for the introduction of sharia principles in law, then that's democracy isn't it?   Don't you support democracy?

So, when I say you are a self-hating masochist I mean it. You would even allow the possibility of Shariah?? Do you even know what Shariah is?? IT is law based on "Allah's principles" and therefore there would be no more democracy. That democratic movement and revolution in Iran in 1979' worked quite well for freedom and democracy, didn't it??

Jared you asked who had voted for a theocracy: Iran is one and if you want to be loose about the term Nigeria, Vatican City, and Tibet (if you accept the Dalai Lama as head of state).  Israel kind of qualifies since the state is founded on a religion but it is a very diluted form athough it is very tough to see anyone besides a Jew being elected to higher office (first to admit I am not up on the Jewish constitution).
Jared, I think he is referring to 1979' Iranian revolution and the vote immediately afterwards for the Islamic Republic.
Yup that is right.  After the overthrow of the Shah the electorate overwhelming voted for an theocracy.  As far as rigged elections go..religion does not have to be involved George Bush springs to mind LOL.
I don't think I ever said "you are not an atheist". I simply said you have no clue what you are talking about when discussing Islam and how Islam through the quran and hadith effects the Muslim populace; after-all, you said yourself that Muslims "don't live their lives based on the quran and hadith"

I'm not sure if anyone else has pointed this out yet, but the penalty for homosexuality in Uganda is death. That's a Christian country. 

I believe that law did not pass, but only after the west lobbied heavily, 1.6 million signatures on a petition and tens of thousands of calls.


© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service