my kind of "hope and change"

[Superlizard]

GL: Enjoy your enlightening discussion of world religion and history with SuperLim. After he reads a book or maybe two on the subject I'll be glad to join in.

Don't flatter yourself too much there, thillary.

 

[Super Turbo Deluxe Custom]

I disagree with your disagreement.  I know we do our share of exploiting.  Our kindness is very conditional to say the least.  If there was any one clear-cut, infalable answer to anything, discussions like this would cease.

Till then, Rosewood or Pao Ferro?

 

[Superlizard]

Well, it jives right along with most of this country's distain for the rich.  The U.S. plays Santa Claus to the rest of the world, and they hate us for it.

Agreed.

To paint this as a religious war is true and untrue at the same time.  #1, you always demonize your enemy.  We did it with the Declaration of Independence, "Endowed by the Creator, certain inalienable rights?"  If you're against that, you're against God, right?  The same with this movement.

I see the point, but I don't think it (demonizing the enemy) fits our founding fathers' intentions with that statement. 

I seriously doubt the sincerity of a suicide bomber's religious motives.  However, I don't doubt their leaders conveniently using/twisting their beliefs to demonize us and justify any means necessary.  So, this is not a religious war to us, but it is to them.

Certainly their leaders brainwash the young, malleable minds to do unspeakable acts (the 72 virgins schtick apparently goes a long ways)... which is why they should be the first targets (heheh).

And it may not be a religious war to some of us, but to others it most definitely is.

 

[guitlouie]

What it has to do with the answer that you are clearly fishing for, to the question that you framed in such a way as to eliminate all other answers, is that the kind of question you are asking does not need to be answered, because you have answered it already by asking such a question, so why should I not take the opportunity to show that the point of view of the observer clouds the end ascertation that "the other guy is inherently evil"?  It must be interesting viewing the entire world from the corner that you have obviously painted yourself into.

 

[Superlizard]

We are viewed as playing the hardest of hardball around the world, on every continent, and there's lots of history to back up that view, none of it requiring tinfoil hats, though SL's pictures of cute little kitties and doggies do garner some sympathy from my poor liberal bleeding heart.

The reason I post the tinfoil hat pictures is because self-proclaimed "intellectuals" like yourself fail to answer simple questions as to your odd paranoid rantings about "highly placed people
witholding the truth" like so:

It's the old "forest for the trees" syndrome, is what I'm suggesting, and some highly placed people really want to prevent average citizens from seeing the forest.

(that goes for Haliburton, etc... as well)

You see, when you make statements like that without proof, that's called being intellectually dishonest... and it proves you don't know what you're talking about, but instead would rather
make up twitchy conspiracies based on how you feel.  Hell, for all we know, you might as well be Rosie O'Donnell, Keith Olbermann or Cindy Sheehan with all that crazy talk.

Of course, you could prove us all wrong by showing us the proof of your accusations... then at least you'd have some of that respect you crave.

 

[dbw]

Okay, so the Muslims want to take over and proselytize everyone.  That's exactly what the Christians want to do, too...

 

[Superlizard]

What it has to do with the answer that you are clearly fishing for, to the question that you framed in such a way as to eliminate all other answers, is that the kind of question you are asking does not need to be answered, because you have answered it already by asking such a question, so why should I not take the opportunity to show that the point of view of the observer clouds the end ascertation that "the other guy is inherently evil"?  It must be interesting viewing the entire world from the corner that you have obviously painted yourself into.

Are you for real?  It was a simple question.

The whole point of that question was to prove that regardless of Ron Paul's wish that America stay out of others' business, there are enemies to our way of life here in America... whether we meddle in their affairs or not.  That particular religious group has been seriously fvcking with the affairs of other nations since they started.

But don't take my word for it - history proves it.

And yeah, a "don't fvck with me, I won't fvck with you" policy generally works with most reasonable-minded people, but there is no reasoning with a religion which was (and is) spread by the sword (although a big fvcking gun might work).

 

[Superlizard]

Okay, so the Muslims want to take over and proselytize everyone.  That's exactly what the Christians want to do, too...

How so?

 

[guitlouie]

Yes, I am very much "for real", and the study of world religions is like a damn pasttime for me, so bring on the history lesson.  But before you do, I want to ask if you realize that both christianity and islam are rife with translational, and interpretational idiosyncracies, such that saying that all followers of islam believe the same thing as a suicide bomber is like saying that all christians believe the same thing as those people who protest at the funerals for gay people with giant signs that say 'God Hates Fags".  

 

[Superlizard]

Yes, I am very much "for real", and the study of world religions is like a damn pasttime for me, so bring on the history lesson.

 

I said "are you for real?" in reference to your insinuations regarding my question... you blew it way out of proportion.

But before you do, I want to ask if you realize that both christianity and islam are rife with translational, and interpretational idiosyncracies, such that saying that all followers of islam believe the same thing as a suicide bomber is like saying that all christians believe the same thing as those people who protest at the funerals for gay people with giant signs that say 'God Hates Fags".

Absolutely not - there are different "shades" if you will... moderates, etc...

But guaranteed that the ones who are cutting off heads and blowing themselves up are the true followers... they are doing exactly
what their book tells them to do.

 

[guitlouie]

Okay.  So in the interest of intellectual honesty, tell me exactly where in the Koran it says to do that.  And while you are at it, tell me exactly which ENGLISH translation you are reading, I would love to dig up my copy to compare notes.

 

[tfarny]

I'm really liking the pao ferro on my new baritone. Just like brazilian RW, to my fingers. And I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree with you, stdc, I'm glad not everyone has the same views because it would make for dull parties. arty07:

I have to add, SL, much as I hate to get into it with you any more: Intellectual dishonesty is not 'making statements without proof' as you just said, it is saying things you know to be false, (ie LYING) or arguing a position even though you have good evidence that your position may well be false, and suppressing or at least not disclosing the evidence (ie BULLSHITTING, otherwise known as Being a Lawyer). I'm sure you think I've done that, too, but I just wanted you to know what the term meant. And I thought it's funny that you think of me as a self-proclaimed-intellectual, since I'm pretty sure I've never claimed to be intellectual, if that even means something anymore. Of course, if you have proof that I called myself an intellectual, please present it so that you don't get accused of being 'intellectually dishonest'.  :toothy12:

 

[Superlizard]

Okay.  So in the interest of intellectual honesty, tell me exactly where in the Koran it says to do that.  And while you are at it, tell me exactly which ENGLISH translation you are reading, I would love to dig up my copy to compare notes.

Surahs (checked against Authorized English Translation and others via Google):

[4:74] Those who readily fight in the cause of GOD are those who forsake this world in favor of the Hereafter. Whoever fights in the cause of GOD, then gets killed, or attains victory, we will surely grant him a great recompense.

[9:111] GOD has bought from the believers their lives and their money in exchange for Paradise. Thus, they fight in the cause of GOD, willing to kill and get killed. Such is His truthful pledge in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Quran - and who fulfills His pledge better than GOD? You shall rejoice in making such an exchange. This is the greatest triumph.

(torah and gospel too?  BS)

[9:123] O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him).

[47:3] When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly.

[48:29] Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another.

[66:9] Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and deal sternly with them. Hell shall be their home, evil their fate.

[5:17] Unbelievers are those who declare: 'God is the Messiah, the son of Mary'.

[5:73] Unbelievers are those that say: 'God is one of three'.

[5:51] Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another.

[5:59] Say: 'People of the Book, is it not that you hate us only because we believe in Allah and in what has been revealed to us and what was formerly revealed, and because most of you are evil-doers?' Say: 'Shall I tell you who will receive a worse reward from Allah? Those whom Allah has cursed and with whom He has been angry, transforming them into apes and swine, and those who serve the devil.

[4:101] The unbelievers are your inveterate foe.

[49:15] The true believers are those that have faith in Allah and His apostle, and never doubt; and who fight with their wealth and with their persons in the cause of Allah. Such are those whose faith is true.

[3:117] Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people.

Any questions?

What - you didn't actually think it was the "Religion of Peace" did ya?  History has proven that lie... and here in their book, you can see exactly why they do what they've been doing for centuries.  Their M.O. hasn't changed in the slightest... gee wonder why?  :icon_biggrin:

Anyhoo, point being - when you're dealing with a religion like this, good luck with reasoning and discussion... Ron Paul himself wouldn't be able to reason with them.

 

[Superlizard]

I have to add, SL, much as I hate to get into it with you any more: Intellectual dishonesty is not 'making statements without proof' as you just said, it is saying things you know to be false, (ie LYING) or arguing a position even though you have good evidence that your position may well be false, and suppressing or at least not disclosing the evidence (ie BULLshiteTING, otherwise known as Being a Lawyer). I'm sure you think I've done that, too, but I just wanted you to know what the term meant. And I thought it's funny that you think of me as a self-proclaimed-intellectual, since I'm pretty sure I've never claimed to be intellectual, if that even means something anymore. Of course, if you have proof that I called myself an intellectual, please present it so that you don't get accused of being 'intellectually dishonest'.  :toothy12:

Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_dishonesty

the advocacy of a position which the advocate does not know to be true, and has not performed rigorous due diligence to ensure the truthfulness of the position

Alright, fine... make up your own terminology.  LOL

So, considering that, instead of calling you "intellectually dishonest", how about I just say you're full of sh!t?  :icon_biggrin:

Look man, if you wanna play the game, don't go spouting off stuff without backing it up.  Can't respect someone who doesn't show the facts for their statements... doesn't matter who they are, what political side they're on, or what religion they follow.  Not my rule, it's just the way it is.  And it's a fast way of losing credibility.

 

[guitlouie]

Deuteronomy 7:1-2 When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations . . . then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy.

20:10-17 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. . . . This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.
    However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you.

Ezekiel 20:25-26 I also gave them over to statutes that were not good and laws they could not live by; I let them become defiled through their gifts—the sacrifice of every firstborn—that I might fill them with horror so they would know that I am the LORD.

Leviticus 25:44-45
Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.

Read the bible sometime, my friend, and you will find that many quotes, taken out of context, and with little to no intellectual searching, will yeild exactly the same "meaning".  This is what I'm talking about, if you just read some interpretation of the words, without knowing the history and context, or even the arguments within the religion of the validity of the quote in question, you will not take away the same meaning as someone is is indeed a true believer, and a pursuant of the path to spiritual enlightenment.

 

[Superlizard]

Deuteronomy 7:1-2 When the Lord your God brings you into the land you are entering to possess and drives out before you many nations . . . then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy.

20:10-17 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. . . . This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.
    However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you.

Ezekiel 20:25-26 I also gave them over to statutes that were not good and laws they could not live by; I let them become defiled through their gifts—the sacrifice of every firstborn—that I might fill them with horror so they would know that I am the LORD.

Leviticus 25:44-45
Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property.

Read the bible sometime, my friend, and you will find that many quotes, taken out of context, and with little to no intellectual searching, will yeild exactly the same "meaning".  This is what I'm talking about, if you just read some interpretation of the words, without knowing the history and context, or even the arguments within the religion of the validity of the quote in question, you will not take away the same meaning as someone is is indeed a true believer, and a pursuant of the path to spiritual enlightenment.

Wait a sec here hoss - you were questioning me about this:

"Okay.  So in the interest of intellectual honesty, tell me exactly where in the Koran it says to do that.  And while you are at it, tell me exactly which ENGLISH translation you are reading, I would love to dig up my copy to compare notes."

Don't go switching things up just yet.

Now, if you're using the above to somehow "prove" that it's all about the "interpretation", well - not much to interpret when it comes to:

"Whoever fights in the cause of GOD, then gets killed, or attains victory"

"When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads"

"Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and deal sternly with them"

"Believers, take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends"

"The true believers are those that have faith in Allah and His apostle, and never doubt; and who fight with their wealth and with their persons in the cause of Allah. Such are those whose faith is true."

etc...

You don't have to agree with me on my Ron Paul/islam thing, but to disagree means you blatantly do so in light of the facts before you.

Furthermore, as far as "interpretation" goes from the Christian side of things:

- A Christian is called a "Christian" because they follow Christ's teachings

- I don't recall a single command spoken of by Christ that tells Christians to (for ex) "fight the unbelievers" or "strike off their heads" or "make war on the unbelievers and hypocrites" etc

Finally, those verses you posted are of historical nature in light of the Jews' past... in other words, God commanded the Jews to do such and such way back when at that time; not commands to keep for all time.

 

[tfarny]

Dude, if that's intellectual dishonesty, then I'm just one of the crowd - advocating a position one does not know to be true, and not doing rigorous due diligence to ensure the truth of it? So, by that definition, your relying on just wikipedia for a definition of intellectual dishonesty definitely makes you intellectually dishonest. :sign13: So when you say 'liberals are like children' or 'guitars don't need string trees' for that matter, you've actually thoroughly researched and verified all those claims? That's really impressive. I just thought you were spouting off.

 

[guitlouie]

Finally, those verses you posted are of historical nature in light of the Jews' past... in other words, God commanded the Jews to do such and such way back when at that time; not commands to keep for all time.

And you know this, because, presumably, you have studied the christian bible.  But if you were to simply take these words and put them in quotes and show them to somebody who has not studied up on the "historical nature" of them, then they would have a profoundly different meaning.  I am ascerting that I personally do not believe that you have studied the teachings of Islam enough to make a judgement on whether the quotes you have posted are even valid quotes, and if they are, what context they were written in.  I sure have not.  I'm saying that scholars on both sides of this, who, I might add have surely studied up on it more than you or I, have been hashing out details of meaning and interpretation since before you or I were even a proverbial twinkle in our daddys eye.  You may think that you know what Islam is all about, but I for one am not buying your interpretation.  Now, it's late as crap here, and I'm going to bed with my girl that I'm not married to, with my bastard sons already asleep, and if you believe some people, no matter how much love is in this house, if we all die before we wake, we will all be burning in some special place in hell.

 

[Superlizard]

Dude, if that's intellectual dishonesty, then I'm just one of the crowd - advocating a position one does not know to be true, and not doing rigorous due diligence to ensure the truth of it? So, by that definition, your relying on just wikipedia for a definition of intellectual dishonesty definitely makes you intellectually dishonest. :sign13: So when you say 'liberals are like children' or 'guitars don't need string trees' for that matter, you've actually thoroughly researched and verified all those claims? That's really impressive. I just thought you were spouting off.

LOL man you really are desperate, ain't ya?

Hell yes liberals are like children - your very own actions prove it.  Want to see the truth?

If you aren't being intellectually dishonest with your kooky conspiracies, you're off making snarky ad hominem attacks and smarmy feigned friendly gestures.  You've spazzed out on more than one occasion in the past.  Not only that, you've kissed the arses of a few in this thread in desperation (but you're on yer own here, bubba).

(Guitars don't need string trees if the angle is enough.  My own Warmoth strat proves that... and IIRC from that thread, there are others who say the same... so what?)

Now, my suggestion to you is either stop this acting out sh!t, or show us the proof... and if you don't have the proof, then don't state it as fact.

 

[Superlizard]

Finally, those verses you posted are of historical nature in light of the Jews' past... in other words, God commanded the Jews to do such and such way back when at that time; not commands to keep for all time.

And you know this, because, presumably, you have studied the christian bible.  But if you were to simply take these words and put them in quotes and show them to somebody who has not studied up on the "historical nature" of them, then they would have a profoundly different meaning.  I am ascerting that I personally do not believe that you have studied the teachings of Islam enough to make a judgement on whether the quotes you have posted are even valid quotes, and if they are, what context they were written in.  I sure have not.  I'm saying that scholars on both sides of this, who, I might add have surely studied up on it more than you or I, have been hashing out details of meaning and interpretation since before you or I were even a proverbial twinkle in our daddys eye.  You may think that you know what Islam is all about, but I for one am not buying your interpretation.  Now, it's late as crap here, and I'm going to bed with my girl that I'm not married to, with my bastard sons already asleep, and if you believe some people, no matter how much love is in this house, if we all die before we wake, we will all be burning in some special place in hell.

Let's humor your stance here for a moment.

Even if someone took and "misinterpreted" certain bible verses................

Last I checked, the headlines aren't reading:

"Quaker Suicide Bombers Blow Up Circuit City"

"Presbyterians Kidnap Another Hostage"

"Baptists Behead Contractor"

"Christians Claim Jews Are The Sons Of Apes And Pigs"

"Jesus-freaks March With Signs Saying. 'Behead Those Who Insult Christianity' "

Furthermore, I fail to see how any of this "pointing the finger at christianity" exonerates the murdering done in islam...  what you are effectively
doing is saying, "But Jimmy does it too!" (what makes it okay then anyways?)... however, today's headlines show that Jimmy doesn't do it too.

So, instead of giving the koran-followers a pass because supposedly "Jimmy does it too" just doesn't make logical sense, and is a poor excuse for their behavior... even if Jimmy was doing it too.