"Ban the Koran"
- Thread starter bradleythehick
- Start date
parisafilm
New member
- Apr 7, 2008
- 19
- 0
- 1
"Ban the Koran"
I'm not giving up my Qu'ran without a fight.
Seriously, what is their problem? Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, and so forth. Why can't they just leave us alone?
I'm not giving up my Qu'ran without a fight.
Seriously, what is their problem? Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, and so forth. Why can't they just leave us alone?
toploser
Member
- Mar 22, 2008
- 37
- 0
- 6
"Ban the Koran"
Maybe it should be banned and his address placed in all the newspapers with the offer of no police protection whatsoever along with his right wing friends addresses for the sake of having fun. I wonder how long it would be before he ends up dead somewhere. Remember people can run fast, but a car can have a lead footed driver with nice shiny chrome cow bars on the front.
I wonder if he has not reproduced to be a possible contender for the Darwin Awards?
Maybe it should be banned and his address placed in all the newspapers with the offer of no police protection whatsoever along with his right wing friends addresses for the sake of having fun. I wonder how long it would be before he ends up dead somewhere. Remember people can run fast, but a car can have a lead footed driver with nice shiny chrome cow bars on the front.
I wonder if he has not reproduced to be a possible contender for the Darwin Awards?
"Ban the Koran"
Ok, I'm going to play devil's advocate and probably get flamed for it here, so take the following with a grain of salt. However, first a few facts about the particular case we are discussing.
1. The "ignorance and xenophobia" arguments don't acutally quite a apply in this particular case (though by no means would I ever say they aren't part of the overall problem). The individual lawmaker in question runs a support group for Muslims who have left the faith. Why is a support group neccessary? Because it's a serious sin to leave the muslim faith if you're a muslim, veiwed by many as being worse than an infidel, and in Iran it's a crime punishable by death.
2. The argument that the individual is strictly hate mongering based on religion does not completely hold up either. This individual, before he proposed this law had been attacked for his involvement with muslims who have left the faith, and had death threats made against him. I would generally have to say he has direct experience with radical islam and his individual actions are a reaction against it.
Because Islam has the largest, most active and most dangerous radical wing of any religion in the world today. Of course this is not to ignore the atrocities that have been committed in the name of god by basicly all other religions, the key is the here and now. How many Buddihsts have strapped bombs to their bellies and blown themselves up in public places in the hope of taking out a few "infidels" they've never so much as met before? How many Hindus? Krishnas? Heck, even Christians (some abortion clinic bombings in the 80s not withstanding)? I happily grant every religion has a radical sect, the difference is in the modern age, Islam's radical followers are responsible for thousands and thousands of innocent deaths- attacks on people unknown to the attackers and for no reason other than religious differences. That should about sum up why the reactionist right wing can't just leave it alone.
[/devil's advocation]
Ok, I'm going to play devil's advocate and probably get flamed for it here, so take the following with a grain of salt. However, first a few facts about the particular case we are discussing.
1. The "ignorance and xenophobia" arguments don't acutally quite a apply in this particular case (though by no means would I ever say they aren't part of the overall problem). The individual lawmaker in question runs a support group for Muslims who have left the faith. Why is a support group neccessary? Because it's a serious sin to leave the muslim faith if you're a muslim, veiwed by many as being worse than an infidel, and in Iran it's a crime punishable by death.
2. The argument that the individual is strictly hate mongering based on religion does not completely hold up either. This individual, before he proposed this law had been attacked for his involvement with muslims who have left the faith, and had death threats made against him. I would generally have to say he has direct experience with radical islam and his individual actions are a reaction against it.
Because Islam has the largest, most active and most dangerous radical wing of any religion in the world today. Of course this is not to ignore the atrocities that have been committed in the name of god by basicly all other religions, the key is the here and now. How many Buddihsts have strapped bombs to their bellies and blown themselves up in public places in the hope of taking out a few "infidels" they've never so much as met before? How many Hindus? Krishnas? Heck, even Christians (some abortion clinic bombings in the 80s not withstanding)? I happily grant every religion has a radical sect, the difference is in the modern age, Islam's radical followers are responsible for thousands and thousands of innocent deaths- attacks on people unknown to the attackers and for no reason other than religious differences. That should about sum up why the reactionist right wing can't just leave it alone.
[/devil's advocation]
azheelshock
New member
- Feb 19, 2008
- 29
- 0
- 1
"Ban the Koran"
Ban the book.
Tag that group with explosive tags that explore if more than 4 group together with known radicals, another problem solved.
Next question.
Sounds like a good film plot to me.
Ban the book.
Tag that group with explosive tags that explore if more than 4 group together with known radicals, another problem solved.
Next question.
Sounds like a good film plot to me.
AnitaAnnSirr
New member
- Feb 19, 2008
- 25
- 0
- 1
"Ban the Koran"
Ok, funny response, but this really wasn't what I was advocating. Just trying to throw some light on the specific situation at hand. Cheers!
Ok, funny response, but this really wasn't what I was advocating. Just trying to throw some light on the specific situation at hand. Cheers!
"Ban the Koran"
Its a sound idea just a few details to sort out, but burn the few save the many works fpor me as i belong in the many camp.
Society is weak and needs a strong line to redress the balance.
Hanging, i'd bring back hanging for as well in them cases qiuetly no press, just get the job done. but hey never gonna happen but one can dream.
Its a sound idea just a few details to sort out, but burn the few save the many works fpor me as i belong in the many camp.
Society is weak and needs a strong line to redress the balance.
Hanging, i'd bring back hanging for as well in them cases qiuetly no press, just get the job done. but hey never gonna happen but one can dream.
I can’t believe we live in the 21st century and this is still happening, and largely tolerated!
Can anyone possibly give a justification for this punishment?
While I don’t advocate banning the Koran or any religious text, you cannot compare it to films. One has to be mentally ill to take a view of reality from a film, where as there are millions of perfectly normal, sane people who take their view of reality from a religious text. Radicals who blow themselves up are not crazy people (compared to, say, the Virginia Tech killer, who was crazy), rather they are usually quite intelligent, educated people who have just had their understanding of reality severely warped.
Although in my view the problem is not the texts themselves per se, rather it is the political correctness approach granted to religion, combined with the extremists who use religion to justify their own extremist ideology, behind the cover of tolerance that religion receives.
Can anyone possibly give a justification for this punishment?
While I don’t advocate banning the Koran or any religious text, you cannot compare it to films. One has to be mentally ill to take a view of reality from a film, where as there are millions of perfectly normal, sane people who take their view of reality from a religious text. Radicals who blow themselves up are not crazy people (compared to, say, the Virginia Tech killer, who was crazy), rather they are usually quite intelligent, educated people who have just had their understanding of reality severely warped.
Although in my view the problem is not the texts themselves per se, rather it is the political correctness approach granted to religion, combined with the extremists who use religion to justify their own extremist ideology, behind the cover of tolerance that religion receives.
"Ban the Koran"
Little extremist there neh? The problem with advocating things like hanging radicals quietly or burning books is you've just reached the same level of intollerance of those you're supposed to be protecting the many from. What's the difference between putting someone to death because they've forsaken islam (that would be, not accepting one prevailing ideology) vs. putting someone to death because they espouse Islam in a non-muslim country (which would be just rejecting a different prevailing ideology) on the premis they MIGHT be a radical.
That's really the key problem for everyone with these kinds of arguments, not just those of us kibitzing about them online, but the world leaders that actually have to set policy with dealing with them. Dealing with them takes one down a slippery moral slope. Quite quickly by trying to protect your own ideology from another, you've gone and emulated all the negative charicteristics of the opposing ideology you were supposed to be protecting yourself from.
Burning/banning any type of religious literature is going too far down that slope. Trying to be the thought police is both counter productive and abhorant to anyone who can credibly consider themselves civilized. Just because there is intollerance in some areas that live more or less under Islamic law doesn't mean we should respond in kind by being intollerant of Islam here. Banning the Koran is effectively banning Islam, and there are in fact milions and milions of muslims who never have and never would blow anyone up; do they deserve this type of persecution? For us in the US (yes, I realize the events in the article take place in the netherlands), banning any religion would be to set us dead opposite the guiding principals our nation was founded on; in this time when we're moving over the shakiest of moral ground this type of action would mean we would have lost our way completely.
Ghandi had it right, as dificult as it still is to accept, tollerance is the only morally correct route; as dificult as it is to pracitce in this day and age.
My further $0.02
Little extremist there neh? The problem with advocating things like hanging radicals quietly or burning books is you've just reached the same level of intollerance of those you're supposed to be protecting the many from. What's the difference between putting someone to death because they've forsaken islam (that would be, not accepting one prevailing ideology) vs. putting someone to death because they espouse Islam in a non-muslim country (which would be just rejecting a different prevailing ideology) on the premis they MIGHT be a radical.
That's really the key problem for everyone with these kinds of arguments, not just those of us kibitzing about them online, but the world leaders that actually have to set policy with dealing with them. Dealing with them takes one down a slippery moral slope. Quite quickly by trying to protect your own ideology from another, you've gone and emulated all the negative charicteristics of the opposing ideology you were supposed to be protecting yourself from.
Burning/banning any type of religious literature is going too far down that slope. Trying to be the thought police is both counter productive and abhorant to anyone who can credibly consider themselves civilized. Just because there is intollerance in some areas that live more or less under Islamic law doesn't mean we should respond in kind by being intollerant of Islam here. Banning the Koran is effectively banning Islam, and there are in fact milions and milions of muslims who never have and never would blow anyone up; do they deserve this type of persecution? For us in the US (yes, I realize the events in the article take place in the netherlands), banning any religion would be to set us dead opposite the guiding principals our nation was founded on; in this time when we're moving over the shakiest of moral ground this type of action would mean we would have lost our way completely.
Ghandi had it right, as dificult as it still is to accept, tollerance is the only morally correct route; as dificult as it is to pracitce in this day and age.
My further $0.02
"Ban the Koran"
And the reason Coulter wants to covert and 'perfect' Jews is?????
Xtian nutbars are just as, if not more dangerous than Muslim nutbars. They work quietly. One day the US will wake up and see how many rights are gone nd the the Xtian right is choking the country.
And the reason Coulter wants to covert and 'perfect' Jews is?????
Xtian nutbars are just as, if not more dangerous than Muslim nutbars. They work quietly. One day the US will wake up and see how many rights are gone nd the the Xtian right is choking the country.
"Ban the Koran"
Um, doesn't America have a death penalty for those who commit treason? Same thing.
If someone leaves Islam and goes around trying to keep people from joining Islam or trys to convince people to leave Islam, then that person is a threat to the religion and must be dealt with accordingly.
It's not because we're bloodthirsty. It's self defense. If someone left Islam, my thinking is "fine, it's your loss". I wouldn't think highly of the person, but that's their decision and God knows best. But if that person goes to a stage and starts saying Islam is evil and rouses people against Islam, then that person is a threat to all Muslims.
Um, doesn't America have a death penalty for those who commit treason? Same thing.
If someone leaves Islam and goes around trying to keep people from joining Islam or trys to convince people to leave Islam, then that person is a threat to the religion and must be dealt with accordingly.
It's not because we're bloodthirsty. It's self defense. If someone left Islam, my thinking is "fine, it's your loss". I wouldn't think highly of the person, but that's their decision and God knows best. But if that person goes to a stage and starts saying Islam is evil and rouses people against Islam, then that person is a threat to all Muslims.
Legolassw
Member
- Mar 17, 2008
- 44
- 0
- 6
"Ban the Koran"
I don't think topher lives in America. Even if he did/does?.. Do you think he does or should find either idea ok or even similar for that matter? I have to say I don't see what your suggesting as a justified action. In my opinion, it's murder over an ideology plain and simple.
Where do the lines get drawn? I'm an atheist, if I go around killing Muslims because they are a threat to what I believe, is that ok? Is it self-defense? Is the ideology so weak it must kill others to keep order in faith? (Lol.. That's not a loaded question or anything. ) You say that person is a threat to all Muslims, but I wonder if all Muslims are ok with you speaking for them?
If you honestly feel this way, shouldn't you agree with idea behind the ban in theory?
I don't think topher lives in America. Even if he did/does?.. Do you think he does or should find either idea ok or even similar for that matter? I have to say I don't see what your suggesting as a justified action. In my opinion, it's murder over an ideology plain and simple.
Where do the lines get drawn? I'm an atheist, if I go around killing Muslims because they are a threat to what I believe, is that ok? Is it self-defense? Is the ideology so weak it must kill others to keep order in faith? (Lol.. That's not a loaded question or anything. ) You say that person is a threat to all Muslims, but I wonder if all Muslims are ok with you speaking for them?
If you honestly feel this way, shouldn't you agree with idea behind the ban in theory?
tryandgetoutalive
Member
- Mar 15, 2008
- 33
- 0
- 6
"Ban the Koran"
No it's not, having free will and making your own decisions is not the same as treason against your country.
If a Muslim becomes a Christian why should he be murdered?
No it's not, having free will and making your own decisions is not the same as treason against your country.
If a Muslim becomes a Christian why should he be murdered?
"Ban the Koran"
cronulla should've tought people in australia this, and the rest of the world should take heed, ISLAM ISGOOD, islamic extremeism isn't. and it's those people who are so supremely bound to their religion like that, that ruin it for all the others. Why should everyone suffer for other peoples piety??
cronulla should've tought people in australia this, and the rest of the world should take heed, ISLAM ISGOOD, islamic extremeism isn't. and it's those people who are so supremely bound to their religion like that, that ruin it for all the others. Why should everyone suffer for other peoples piety??
squetta8491
New member
- Apr 9, 2008
- 29
- 0
- 1
"Ban the Koran"
Some people need to learn that in many countries Secular State Law is higher than their own religious laws. No one forces them to stay though.
Some people need to learn that in many countries Secular State Law is higher than their own religious laws. No one forces them to stay though.
"Ban the Koran"
WHY??!! Why is it his loss?? people have the right to they're own opinion, and the right to believe what they want. What is someone reads through the koran and they find something they personally consider evil? they've a right to pass on they're views. the whole rallying thing is wrong, but honestly. Extremest do that for themselves. If someone see's on the new that an extremeist has blowen himself up with fifty other people, the think " what a nasty person." not " He's showing us how much he believes in Islam."
WHY??!! Why is it his loss?? people have the right to they're own opinion, and the right to believe what they want. What is someone reads through the koran and they find something they personally consider evil? they've a right to pass on they're views. the whole rallying thing is wrong, but honestly. Extremest do that for themselves. If someone see's on the new that an extremeist has blowen himself up with fifty other people, the think " what a nasty person." not " He's showing us how much he believes in Islam."
"Ban the Koran"
So, I was thinking the other day....
Jews, Muslims, Christians - three religions that hate eachother and yet they have similarities (one God, prophets, etc)
The religious books: Talmud, Qur'an, Bible all written by man, not God
How can we be sure that our religion is the "real" one? I mean, any nutbar could've said they had a dream and they talked to God and He said this and that. Anyone could've added to that book what they wanted to. Anyone could claim that God sent them to promote religion...maybe they had some kind of special powers? So does this mean that Chris Angel might be a prophet?
I guess the bottom line is: fighting and killing because of different religious beliefs is like fighting over who has a better imaginary friend = retarded (and I don't know who said this, but I read it somewhere )
EDIT: misspelled "who" for "how"
So, I was thinking the other day....
Jews, Muslims, Christians - three religions that hate eachother and yet they have similarities (one God, prophets, etc)
The religious books: Talmud, Qur'an, Bible all written by man, not God
How can we be sure that our religion is the "real" one? I mean, any nutbar could've said they had a dream and they talked to God and He said this and that. Anyone could've added to that book what they wanted to. Anyone could claim that God sent them to promote religion...maybe they had some kind of special powers? So does this mean that Chris Angel might be a prophet?
I guess the bottom line is: fighting and killing because of different religious beliefs is like fighting over who has a better imaginary friend = retarded (and I don't know who said this, but I read it somewhere )
EDIT: misspelled "who" for "how"
computerguyt
Member
- Apr 7, 2008
- 36
- 0
- 6
"Ban the Koran"
Good post - more people think like that - less hate in the world for everyone
Good post - more people think like that - less hate in the world for everyone
"Ban the Koran"
It's just another far-right politician trying to win more votes from bigots and morons, and Muslims are the current bogeymen of choice for the far right at the moment.
For a right-wing audience, politians know that they only have to mention certain words, such as 'Islam' or 'immigration' and they will get a positive reaction, regardless of whether they are actually making any sense or not. It's more of a Pavlovian response than anything else.
Anyway, if this idea had an ounce of credibility then you'd have to ban the Torah, the Bible and probably a few other books besides.
Banning books is never a good thing. In a free society, people should be able to read things and make up their own minds.
If someone publishes a new book which is infalaofftopictory or clearly intened to stir up hatred then people should be made aware of it's content. But censorship of any kind is potentially the first step on a slippery slope.
Banning a book which has been around for centuries is just plain daft anyway!
It's just another far-right politician trying to win more votes from bigots and morons, and Muslims are the current bogeymen of choice for the far right at the moment.
For a right-wing audience, politians know that they only have to mention certain words, such as 'Islam' or 'immigration' and they will get a positive reaction, regardless of whether they are actually making any sense or not. It's more of a Pavlovian response than anything else.
Anyway, if this idea had an ounce of credibility then you'd have to ban the Torah, the Bible and probably a few other books besides.
Banning books is never a good thing. In a free society, people should be able to read things and make up their own minds.
If someone publishes a new book which is infalaofftopictory or clearly intened to stir up hatred then people should be made aware of it's content. But censorship of any kind is potentially the first step on a slippery slope.
Banning a book which has been around for centuries is just plain daft anyway!