The Non-American Politics Thread

[Illuminati Confirmed!]

Illuminati Confirmed, interesting you say that because increasingly, as of late, atheists are less and less appreciated in Western, white society because of strong recurrence of extreme conservatist waves.

Also, your last comparison is invalid.
Jews hate Hitler, not all Germans
You're going out of your way to discredit all Muslims. ALL of them. Not even all Muslims, but as Crni implies, other brown people too, just for being too brown. You've tried to explain this rationally, for several pages in the American elections thread, and you probably could keep explaining it, for hundreds of pages more, but it's just good old "Brown is the color of poo, therefore I dislike those people"-racism.
Embrace it, at least. Be true - to yourself!

Atheists are less and less appreciated because many are associated with the left, and often criticize Christianity and nationalism while remaining silent on the far greater evil that is Islam.

Islam is not a nationality. It is not a race. It's an ideology. A far more terrible one than nazism ever was.

Not denying the fact that some races are on average less intelligent than others does not imply hatred. By that logic, I would hate myself and my own race for not being Ashkenazi or east Asian.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Being a racist doesn't mean you have to hate everyone ...

 

[zegh8578]

Atheists are less and less appreciated because many are associated with the left, and often criticize Christianity and nationalism while remaining silent on the far greater evil that is Islam.

Islam is not a nationality. It is not a race. It's an ideology. A far more terrible one than nazism ever was.

Not denying the fact that some races are on average less intelligent than others does not imply hatred. By that logic, I would hate myself and my own race for not being Ashkenazi or east Asian.

In the end you are generalizing. You are blaming innocent people for the ills brought on by guilty people. That's a no-no.
That's why we shouldn't go after all Jews, just because banker tops are often Jewish.

Islam is - for the vast majority - "a religion of peace" (insert eyerolls, huffs and puffs), but it IS. And yes, yes, I read Breivik's "kompendium" too, where he explained that the "moderate muslim is just a myth", but I have actually met "moderate muslims", myself. Grew up with several of them.
Oh, but no, that's when this argument flies in: But those aren't Muslims, lol, they're failed or fake or not actually.

But they are. They are "moderate", in their failure at wanting to be fanatical.
And most muslims are, no matter what far-right skinhead nazis suggest, moderate.

 

[Illuminati Confirmed!]

What is European for you? What do you think makes someone European? The reason why I would not want Turkey in the EU is because of Erdogan and their current politics. Not because I think Muslims or Turks are worse people compared to Germans or French - who started the Hollocaust and Collonialism by the way? Ask the Africans how civiliced French people can be. Or Belgians for that matter. We Europeans are oh so proud, always, about our intellect. I've seen this superiority with the Kosovo. Gave them their indpendence, and now they denny people from the Balkan, fleeing from poverty, entry in to the Eurozone.
Seriously. I can't hear this bullshit rhetoric anymore, my parents are from Serbia, I was born in Mannheim, Germany. I've experienced two cultures right from my birth. I have grown up and worked with so many different cultures trough my youth, that I consider my self and everyone else humans, not Germans, Americans or Europeans. And I have seen it all ...

The Saxons don't belong here! They are not Bavarians! The muslims don't belong here, they are not German! The Turks don't belong in the EU, they are not Europeans!

If most muslims are so great, why are all their countries such crap?

I just don't want to repeat history again, you racist twat. I have seen what this kind of politics can lead to, and it is still one of the darkest chapters in Serbian history, no one really talks about and would rather love to forget about.

I don't want history to repeat itself either. You've just cherry picked an incident where muslims were the victim, conveniently ignoring that throughout most of history, Muslims were agressors, and unlike evil whitey, they didn't improve the living standards in the places they occupied and colonized.

​

Muslims = Humans. ​

Blame individuals for their actions, not religions or nations as a whole.

Nazis = Humans
​

Blame individuals for their actions, not entire ideologies.

See how idiotic that sounds?

 

[Crni Vuk]

If most muslims are so great, why are all their countries such crap?

Hmm, no clue? If Christians and Europeans are so great, why is Russia still not awesome, or Itally - particularly the south around Neaples -, or Greece, Spain most of the Balkan.
Could it be, because it is all more complicated than just muslims did it!. Also, last time I checked, Turkey, was economically not the worst nation in this world. Same for Iran, and some Arabian nations, infact Iran has even a parliament, imagine that. But I guess dividing the world in black and white, makes live easier.

Currently, the Parliament's 290 members, fourteen of whom represent non-Muslim religious minorities(4.8%), are popularly elected for four-year terms. About 8% of the Parliament are women, while the global average is 13%.[5] The Parliament can force the dismissal of cabinet ministers by no-confidence votes and can impeach the president for misconduct in office. Although the executive proposes most new laws, individual deputies of the Parliament also may introduce legislation. Deputies also may propose amendments to bills being debated. The Parliament also drafts legislation, ratifies international treaties, and approves the national budget.


All People's House of Iran candidates and all legislation from the assembly must be approved by the Guardian Council. Candidates must pledge in writing that they are committed, in theory and in practice, to the Iranian constitution.

According to Wiki, no clue if that's accurate. But @Serge doesn't look like one of those blood thirsty killer Muslims.

Nazis = Humans
​

Blame individuals for their actions, not entire ideologies.

See how idiotic that sounds?

Uhm, no. If you really believe that, I would actually applaud you and your intellect, as it actually sounds pretty logic and correct. You can not treat ideologies or religions like people. You can not schackle it, throw it in front of a curt or fight it with weapons. And any try to do so, will just end up in a dissaster.

Have you ever read something about John Rabe? No? Wouldn't surprise me, the idea of a good Nazi, isn't something that fitts to the popular opinion of black vs. white. Most people just know the story behind Oscar Schindler, who made quite a fortune with exploiting jews, before he decided to help them, but that just by the way. John Rabe was a supporter of Hitler and the Nazi Party in China, from all we know, you could call him a Nazi. And yet, he risked his life for the Chinese, wrote letters to Hitler, protected them from the Japanese. Which earned him the nickname, the living Buddha of Nanking. Does that mean we have to agree with the Nazis, or aprove of the ideology? No, of course not.
But what seperates us from the die hard nazis or the islamic terrorists is the fact taht we CAN differentiate, and that we CAN treat them better, as humans. And we should, because those are AS WELL European values, remember? Freedom of religion, human dignity, body infringement, basic human rights, fair and just trials, treating people for their crimes, not their thoughts. And not spouting anti islamic rhetoric and a cry for stronger laws that won't protect us from ideologies anyway. And which might send us down a path, that has proven to be very dangerous in the 1920s and 30s, if you start to replace Muslims with Jews.
As I've said, we saw it happen in Yugoslavia during the Civil war.

I don't want history to repeat itself either. You've just cherry picked an incident where muslims were the victim, conveniently ignoring that throughout most of history, Muslims were agressors, and unlike evil whitey, they didn't improve the living standards in the places they occupied and colonized.

People who base their opinions on 'inductive logic' and then complain about other people not having any evidence (read: not evidence they like) for their statements are funny.

People who talk about women being raped by refugees in the thousands in Europe and then accuse people of basing their opinions on 'secondhand sources' are even better.

 

[Illuminati Confirmed!]

Hmm, no clue? If Christians and Europeans are so great, why is Russia still not awesome, or Itally - particularly the south around Neaples -, or Greece, Spain most of the Balkan.
Could it be, because it is all more complicated than just muslims did it!. Also, last time I checked, Turkey, was economically not the worst nation in this world. Same for Iran, and some Arabian nations, infact Iran has even a parliament, imagine that. But I guess dividing the world in black and white, makes live easier.

The difference is, that you can actually cite Christian nations which are great, and mind you it's a lot harder to actually make great systems then it is to simply copy them, which is all the muslim countries would be doing if they shared any of Europe's values. Even the economically successful muslim countries are still opressive towards atheists, women, homosexuals, other religions, wrong kinds of muslims, and so on.

Also, notice that all the European countries you mentioned as not being great have one common element in their histories.

Currently, the Parliament's 290 members, fourteen of whom represent non-Muslim religious minorities(4.8%), are popularly elected for four-year terms. About 8% of the Parliament are women, while the global average is 13%.[5] The Parliament can force the dismissal of cabinet ministers by no-confidence votes and can impeach the president for misconduct in office. Although the executive proposes most new laws, individual deputies of the Parliament also may introduce legislation. Deputies also may propose amendments to bills being debated. The Parliament also drafts legislation, ratifies international treaties, and approves the national budget.


All People's House of Iran candidates and all legislation from the assembly must be approved by the Guardian Council. Candidates must pledge in writing that they are committed, in theory and in practice, to the Iranian constitution.

According to Wiki, no clue if that's accurate. But @Serge doesn't look like one of those blood thirsty killer Muslims.

Having a parliament doesn't really mean anything. And it being able to impeach the president doesn't mean much since the president isn't the head of state.

I don't know Serge, but using that as an argument is like saying that since you know a tall Indonesian, the statement that Indonesians are on average shorter than any other nation must be false.

Uhm, no. If you really believe that, I would actually applaud you and your intellect, as it actually sounds pretty logic and correct. You can not treat ideologies or religions like people. You can not schackle it, throw it in front of a curt or fight it with weapons. And any try to do so, will just end up in a dissaster.

Have you ever read something about John Rabe? No? Wouldn't surprise me, the idea of a good Nazi, isn't something that fitts to the popular opinion of black vs. white. Most people just know the story behind Oscar Schindler, who made quite a fortune with exploiting jews, before he decided to help them, but that just by the way. John Rabe was a supporter of Hitler and the Nazi Party in China, from all we know, you could call him a Nazi. And yet, he risked his life for the Chinese, wrote letters to Hitler, protected them from the Japanese. Which earned him the nickname, the living Buddha of Nanking. Does that mean we have to agree with the Nazis, or aprove of the ideology? No, of course not.

My point wasn't that every single Nazi is evil, but if you heard that a million Nazi refugees were seeking asylum in your country, would you grant it?

But what seperates us from the die hard nazis or the islamic terrorists is the fact taht we CAN differentiate, and that we CAN treat them better, as humans. And we should, because those are AS WELL European values, remember? Freedom of religion, human dignity, body infringement, basic human rights, fair and just trials, treating people for their crimes, not their thoughts. And not spouting anti islamic rhetoric and a cry for stronger laws that won't protect us from ideologies anyway. And which might send us down a path, that has proven to be very dangerous in the 1920s and 30s, if you start to replace Muslims with Jews.
As I've said, we saw it happen in Yugoslavia during the Civil war.

Why would I not spout rhetoric against a violent, barbaric and expansionist ideology? Your mistake is that you view Islam as just a religion, while the separation of church and state never happened in Islamic societies. It's a system of government.

The comparison to the Jewish situation in the 20s and 30s is nonsensical.

 

[Ragemage]

I don't really want to butt headfirst into something I don't fully understand, but could someone maybe go over a couple of points of why letting Turkey join EU would be a good thing?

I don't have problems with Turkish people, it's the government I have a problem with. I wouldn't want the Turkish government having more influence in European affairs than they're already getting. I mean, this is the same government that is actively denying the cold hard fact they committed genocide against the Armenian people, of which I know several whose families fled here from Armenia to escape persecution. If they won't even own up to the fact they committed genocide years ago without tons of media pressure, who knows what else they're lying about? Let's also not forget that Turkey actively harbors known terrorists. ( http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Yaalon-slams-Turkey-for-harboring-terrorism-379456 ) That has nothing to do with the people but entirely with the government.

I'm not trying to start an argument here, so please be civil, I'm just really wondering why anyone would advocate for Turkey to join the EU when their track record is pretty terrible, even compared to Cold War Russia?

 

[Gonzalez]

Argentina, on a UN decision expands continental shelf area by 35% to 350 miles
Foreign minister Susana Malcorra is scheduled to officially announce on Monday the external limit of Argentina's continental shelf based on a unanimous decision from the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, (dependent from the Oceans and Law of the Sea), which adds to Argentina's shelf 1.7 million square kilometers, apparently confirming areas surrounding the Falklands/Malvinas, other South Atlantic islands and the Antarctica Argentine sector.

Falklands are ours, mothas...

 

[zegh8578]

In my comic fiction, the Falklands are independent (anecdotal world-info, not in any way relevant to plot)
Everybody wins
Except the Falklands

 

[Gonzalez]

You make it sound like they could be a nation. An independant village of under 2.000 inbred sheep sodomizers... funny.

 

[Crni Vuk]

The difference is, that you can actually cite Christian nations which are great, and mind you it's a lot harder to actually make great systems then it is to simply copy them, which is all the muslim countries would be doing if they shared any of Europe's values.

So if they follow their ideals, it's wrong. If they don't, they just copy us. So I guess, no matter what they do, they can't make anything right, I suppose.
Since the idea of democracy is a Greek thing, should they not be your master race? It's all a process where things evolved and changed constantly over the last 10 000 years, or at least since humans started to record history.

Also, notice that all the European countries you mentioned as not being great have one common element in their histories.

Which element would that be?

Having a parliament doesn't really mean anything. And it being able to impeach the president doesn't mean much since the president isn't the head of state.

I don't know, people in Somalia or Iraq would probably be happy to be at least as far as Iran. That's what I mean, when I say, things are not always black or white. Iran in particular, had a very violent and unstable history, with many upheavals, political changes, a war which was going for 12 years, those kind of things leave their marks, you know. They only started a couple of years ago to actually experience something like stability.

I don't know Serge, but using that as an argument is like saying that since you know a tall Indonesian, the statement that Indonesians are on average shorter than any other nation must be false.

Apples =/= Oranges. Serge has studied in Germany, and he has returned to Iran, where most of his family is. If someone can tell you the difference between those two cultures, it's him. And I would guess, that he knows a lot more about it than you, and I. That's the point.

My point wasn't that every single Nazi is evil, but if you heard that a million Nazi refugees were seeking asylum in your country, would you grant it?

*Shrugs* The US did. Not a million, but they would have taken those as well, if they had the right education ...
And comparing ALL Muslims with the WORST of the Nazis. Awesome. And you don't see any problem with that logic of yours?

Why would I not spout rhetoric against a violent, barbaric and expansionist ideology? Your mistake is that you view Islam as just a religion, while the separation of church and state never happened in Islamic societies. It's a system of government.

I just refrain from judging billions of people, with countless of different ideals, beliefs, experiences, education and character. People I don't even know. Islamophobia, isn't going to solve the problem of Islamic fundamentalism.

To quote an example out of some article, to the issue of "Islam hates us (the west)":
Who is Islam? Where does he live? Does he have an email address to which I can direct follow-up questions? How can you possibly believe that a religion 1,400 years old, with well over 1.5 billion adherents, who are found in almost every part of the planet, and represent a diversity that is as bewildering as it is overwhelming, simply hates us?

The comparison to the Jewish situation in the 20s and 30s is nonsensical.

Why?

 

[Illuminati Confirmed!]

So if they follow their ideals, it's wrong. If they don't, they just copy us. So I guess, no matter what they do, they can't make anything right, I suppose.
Since the idea of democracy is a Greek thing, should they not be your master race? It's all a process where things evolved and changed constantly over the last 10 000 years, or at least since humans started to record history.

It's a fact that the most successful modern models of government known to man were created by western European nations and their offshoots. And it takes a lot less effort to get things right when you have an example of how to do it.

Which element would that be?

Nearly all of Spain was occupied by muslims, some parts like Granada for as along as 700 years. The Balkans and Greece were under Ottoman occupation for 500 years. Sicily was also an emirate for almost a century, and all of Italy had to deal with constant raiding from muslim pirates, which is the reason many coastal settlements were abandoned in favor of walled citadels in the hills. Russia was ruled by muslim Tatars for centuries, with those parts not directly under control of the horde being victims of constant looting and slave runs.

I don't know, people in Somalia or Iraq would probably be happy to be at least as far as Iran. That's what I mean, when I say, things are not always black or white. Iran in particular, had a very violent and unstable history, with many upheavals, political changes, a war which was going for 12 years, those kind of things leave their marks, you know. They only started a couple of years ago to actually experience something like stability.

I wasn't saying that Iran is the absolute worst place in the world. But that doesn't make it good either.

*Shrugs* The US did. Not a million, but they would have taken those as well, if they had the right education ...

And if all the immigrants pouring into Europe were world-renowned scientists we wouldn't be having this conversation. But they aren't.

I just refrain from judging billions of people, with countless of different ideals, beliefs, experiences, education and character. People I don't even know. Islamophobia, isn't going to solve the problem.

You speak of Islam as if it was a race rather than an ideology. What is wrong in opposing such a vicious ideology?

That is unless you buy into the "Islam means peace" crap. It means subjugation/submission.

Why?

Because the only connecting element is that both Jews and muslims are a minority. Even the type of minority is different, as Jews were mostly viewed as a race while muslims are defined as those who follow a religion.

The Jews were feared because they were instrumental in bringing communism, with all its terror and starvation, to Russia, and most communist revolutions that happened in the same period were Jewish-led. No one in the 20s or 30s feared that massive armies of Jews were going to march into the country and eventually outnumber the natives.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Nearly all of Spain was occupied by muslims, some parts like Granada for as along as 700 years. The Balkans and Greece were under Ottoman occupation for 500 years.

And again, Muslims, Muslims, Muslims. An allem sind die Muslims schuld. You sound like a broken record ... it was not a muslims who decided to build concentration camps in Serbia and telling them to murder children, and innocent civilans. I am pretty sure I could find some evidence of equall brutallity in christian history, but then you would twist it around, because it's either the fault of the Muslims, or that it's not relevant history. Funny how that works, when you only allow evidence that you like.

That is unless you buy into the "Islam means peace" crap. It means subjugation/submission.

No, That's not what I am saying, I never said that you shouldn't be critical about religions, never question their ideals or the danger which can come from it in the form of fanatism. All I am saying is that we should not treat Islam different compared to any other religon, or creating some kind of double standard here, as this simply does not work together with the western ideals that you hold so dear. The dangers of such a rhetoric, has been already known by some of the most prominent figures who founded, what is seen as one of the best democracies today:

I hold the right of expatriation to be inherent in every man by the laws of nature, & incapable of being rightfully taken from him even by the united will of every other person in the nation. if the laws have provided no particular mode by which the right of expatriation may be exercised, the individual may do it by any effectual & unequivocal act or declaration.
Thomas Jefferson to Albert Gallatin about, every man has a natural right to leave the nation of his birth.

It [has] been the wise policy of these states to extend the protection of their laws to all those who should settle among them of whatever nation or religion they might be and to admit them to a participation of the benefits of civil and religious freedom, and… the benevolence of this practice as well as its salutary effects [has] rendered it worthy of being continued in future times.”
- Thomas Jefferson on Immigration policy.

“neither Pagan nor Mahamedan (Muslims) nor Jew ought to be excluded from the civil rights of the Commonwealth because of his religion.”
Thomas Jefferson quoting British philosopher John Locke.

The bill for establishing religious freedom, the principles of which had, to a certain degree, been enacted before, I had drawn in all the latitude of reason and right. It still met with opposition; but, with some mutilations in the preamble, it was finally passed; and a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares, that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word “Jesus Christ,” so that it should read, “a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion;” the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan (Muslims), the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.
- This Statute became the basis of the freedom of religion enshrined in the First Amendment. The freedom it upholds is total and without exception. (...)

“Every man, conducting himself as a good citizen, and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshipping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience.”
-- George Washington, letter to the United Baptist Chamber of Virginia, May 1789, in Anson Phelps Stokes, Church and State in the United States, Vol 1. p. 495, quoted from Albert J Menendez and Edd Doerr, The Great Quotations on Religious Freedom

“I had always hoped that this land might become a safe and agreeable Asylum to the virtuous and persecuted part of mankind, to whatever nation they might belong.“
-- George Washington, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, a Mennonite minister, May 28, 1788, in Paul F Boller, George Washington & Religion (1963) p. 118, quoted from Ed and Michael Buckner, "Quotations that Support the Separation of State and Church"

"I am fully of your Opinion respecting religious Tests; but, tho' the People of Massachusetts have not in their new Constitution kept quite clear of them, yet, if we consider what that People were 100 Years ago, we must allow they have gone great Lengths in Liberality of Sentiment on religious Subjects; and we may hope for greater Degrees of Perfection, when their Constitution, some years hence, shall be revised. If Christian Preachers had continued to teach as Christ and his Apostles did, without Salaries, and as the Quakers now do, I imagine Tests would never have existed; for I think they were invented, not so much to secure Religion itself, as the Emoluments of it. When a Religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself, and God does not take care to support it so that its Professors are obliged to call for help of the Civil Power, it is a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one."
(Benjamin Franklin, 1706-1790, from a letter to Richard Price, Oct. 9, 1780; from Adrienne Koch, ed., The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society, New York: George Braziller, 1965, p. 93.]

And from where have people like Jefferson got their experience? From Christians prosecuting other christians for their beliefs. All of those people, have grown up, fully aware what it means when you judge people based on their religion and belief alone, as it was not uncommon that many christian groups fleed from Britain and other European nations to the US, as they have been prosecuted, jailed and often enough murdered, in their native country. And the same can be said today about many Muslims, as they flee from ISIS and other radical groups, who do spend more time fighting other Muslims, which they don't recognize as part of the Islam, instead of us in the west.
Is the Islam a peacefull religion? Show me one peacefull religion. You will have a hard time to find one that is trully peacefull. At least from the big 5 ones. Both Christianity and Judaism contain tenets calling for war, agression, prosection of minorities like homosexuals. You are very quick with your judgment on cultures and beliefs you hardly know, calling others bararians and iliterate, while you make the same mistakes as those terrorists you despise and fear. Which is interesting, because you're playing in to their hands.

If I were an adviser to the jihadists, I’d tell them to get every one of JC Wilcox’s anti-Muslim letters and put them out on the Internet for young Muslims to read.
Under his racist and vicious letters I'd tell them to write, "Don't take our word for it. Just read these letters and you'll know that the 'war on terror' is really a war on Islam. Join us today to save our glorious religion."

The extremists on both sides feed off each other and ultimately benefit from each other.

- Eric Bahrt

 

[Walpknut]

Is this Illuminati kid a Trump supporter?

"Why are all middle eastern countries such crap?"

Ask you political and military leaders, read up on some history, these Extremist Islamic groups are a direct cause of the US' intervention, invasion and abuse of countries in the middle east, and it goes all the way to directly fund, arm and train groups that would later turn into ISIS and Alqaueda just for political gain of their own. The reason these people are rising under the banner of Islam is not because Islam is any worse than Christianity (Christianity is plenty fucked up all by itself) but because these groups have used religion to manipulate an abused population into submission and accepting atrocities. Just like Hitler did with socialism, and just as it happened there it didn't come out of nowhere. Through history the "good guys" have always been the direct responsibles for creating the worst monsters.

 

[Ragemage]

Is this Illuminati kid a Trump supporter?

Yes: http://www.nma-fallout.com/threads/us-presidential-elections-thread.205323/#post-4135611

edit: you may need to scroll up to see it

 

[Vergil]

If all of the Middle East's problems are "dah evil white nation's fault" how come even in rich moslem countries like Saudi Arabia they still treat women like shit and cut off eachother's heads? How come when they come to Europe and are given free food, water and healthcare and are even allowed to keep their "beliefs" and have them catered to do they rape and kill still? Maybe instead of blaming the United States it's time to face reality that Islam is a religion that breeds killers and rapists. Before you start crying about the "overwhelming number of moderate muslims" I'd ask you to please look at the statistics.

-snip-

Um, you do know they Washington and Jefferson both had very scathing things to say about Jews right? Also Jefferson had to lead a war against Muslim pirates because they were kidnapping and enslaving Americans and Europeans and refused to stop without a hefty bribe.

On the topic of Christianity being just as bad as Islam I'd ask for your proof. And if you bring up the Crusades I'd just like to remind everyone that the Muslims started it by invading major Christian cities and enslaving their people, taking/raping Europeans off the coast of southern Italy and trying to invade Europe through the Byzantines. The Crusades were a retaliatory effort against invaders. Not "teh evil christian nahtzees!!11!!11". Or perhaps you'd like to post some Bible verses to make Christianity look barbaric. Which would be interesting as I could match and even out do anything in the Bible with things 10 times as bad in the Qu'ran which was written later and thus has less of an excuse to be so ancient in it's laws.

 

[Walpknut]

"Please look at the statistics" the racist's battle cry. Even tho they usually cherry pick those to hell and back.

Funny how you side step acknowledging your own country's wrong doing with a racist rant. Didn't expect less.

 

[Crni Vuk]

I'd ask you to please look at the statistics.

What statistic?
Look. No one. Seriously. NO ONE, here is saying there are NO problems based on religion. But you guys are so focused on blaming BILLIONS(!) of people here, for literaly the SAME SHIT that has been done by countless of christians for the last 1500 years. All of the progroms in Europe, the Crussades, Collonialism which was not far from genocide in some cases, Slavery, christian terrorism and fundamentalism, even today.

Is there a problem in the Muslim world which has it's root in religion? YES! No one here will denny that! NO ONE. Has a large part of Europe and the US managed to overcome such issues? Yes! Again. No one will denny that. But that still doesn't give us the right to talk about BILLIONS(!) of people, because Islam is not this one gigantic ideology, just as Christianity or Judaism isn't. There are like countless of different schools inside all of those religions. Do you judge every Jew based on on their fanatic orthodox believers who want to kill every Palestinian? Do you blame the Pope for what the Mormons prey or what the Jehovah's witnesses do? No? Of course you wouldn't! Because not all people act or think the same!

Um, you do know they Washington and Jefferson both had very scathing things to say about Jews right? Also Jefferson had to lead a war against Muslim pirates because they were kidnapping and enslaving Americans and Europeans and refused to stop without a hefty bribe.

Yeah, and that doesn't surprise me much. Jefferson and Washington both have been also slave owners. They have been, despite of their whisdom and knowledge, people of their time. And, yet they also knew what kind of powder keg slavery was, and aknowledged the hypocritical side of it.

Just because they don't like something - like Jefferson with jews, doesn't mean they would not stand up for what they thought was right. Like fighting for religious liberty. It just shows, that people, can't be so easily defined by a strict black or white thinking.
At the end of the day, we are all just humans.

 

[Vergil]

What statistic?
Look. No one. Seriously. NO ONE, here is saying there are NO problems based on religion. But you guys are so focused on blaming BILLIONS(!) of people here, for literaly the SAME SHIT that has been done by countless of christians for the last 1500 years. All of the progroms in Europe, the Crussades, Collonialism which was not far from genocide in some cases, Slavery, christian terrorism and fundamentalism, even today.

Colonialism A: Was not reigious warfare B: Actually improved the lives of those countries. When the Europeans came in life expectancy and standard of living went up. When they left they went back down. Not even close to the same thing as muslims coming into Europe and mass raping thee women there.
Crusades I already explained.
Slavery, like a lot of more old age institutions have stopped in Western countries. 9 year old girls are still married off and forced to become wives to grown men in muslim circles.
Give some examples of modern Christian terrorism if you can find them

Christianity has many different denominations, none of which practice the same savagry that the Sunni and Shia Islam promote.
If the data on Jews showed that an overwhelming majority agreed with committing acts of brutal savagery than yes I would harshly criticize the religion (which I do but let's focus on Islam, the topic of this discussion).

Heres those stats btw:

 

[Crni Vuk]

Colonialism A: Was not reigious warfare B: Actually improved the lives of those countries.

Oh yes ... it improved it sooooo much. I am sure King Leopold II would agree with you, on every account. They call him the Butcher of Congo for a reason.

Torment and rape

He turned his "Congo Free State" into a massive labour camp, made a fortune for himself from the harvest of its wild rubber, and contributed in a large way to the death of perhaps 10 million innocent people.

What is now called the Democratic Republic of Congo has clearly never recovered.

"Legalized robbery enforced by violence", as Leopold's reign was described at the time, has remained, more or less, the template by which Congo's rulers have governed ever since.

Meanwhile Congo's soldiers have never moved away from the role allocated to them by Leopold - as a force to coerce, torment and rape an unarmed civilian population.

Heres those stats btw:

You haven't even mentioned how they conduct their polls, how the data is collected, how the population is polled to give an accurate reading.

Something else to consider as well:

A Closer Look at Recent Pew Study:
Mainstream Muslim Americans

Other areas in the survey itself lack necessary framing. Opinions on suicide bombing, for example, have become a primary point of interest. Those surveyed were asked can suicide bombing of civilian targets to defend Islam be justified? The answers reported were: often/sometimes 8%, rarely 5%, and never 78%. A 13% approval of civilian targets is alarming. However, the question does not supply support for the assumptions that will inevitably be made from the numbers. The poll results do not explain any motives behind the answers given (like desperate living conditions) or the conditions that would have been specified in conversation (such as exhausted alternatives). Furthermore, the study itself does not include comparable polled opinions of non-Muslims. The general American population would not be very supportive if asked about suicide bombing to defend Islam. Yet, if the question had been presented with the word Islam replaced by Christianity, freedom, or America the results would likely have been very similar to that of the Muslims surveyed. Unfortunately, a useful reference point is not provided. Conclusions are destined to remain vague notions without numbers relevant to non-Muslims that might supply a comparison be made between the two.