|
Jihad on Denmark - freedom of expression rears its ugly head once again... (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
I'd rather not comment on that.
It not like you can pick and choose which parts you like and which parts you don't, unless you think you're better informed than God. And if you don't think it's from a divine source (and unadultrated, atleast some particular aspect uo're concerned with), why would you follow religion X in the first place?
So in your eyes, anyone who "lives by the book" is a fundie? Well, please define fundamentalist for me then so I know exactly what you're talking about. |
Ok, let's take the story of Genesis for example. By your definiton, a person who does not accept that the story of Genesis is a legitimate historical fact written by god himself is a disbeliever. Wow, gee, Ratzinger should get himself a new job then!
Or let's see, a quick quote from the Kuran (which didn't take a long time to search since it's already in the 2nd chapter)
| quote: | 2:6 As for the Disbelievers, Whether thou warn them or thou warn them not it is all one for them; they believe not.
2:7 Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom.
2:8 And of mankind are some who say: We believe in Allah and the Last Day, when they believe not.
2:9 They think to beguile Allah and those who believe, and they beguile none save themselves; but they perceive not.
2:10 In their hearts is a disease, and Allah increaseth their disease. A painful doom is theirs because they lie. |
Yup, don't bother to turn disbelievers into believers because Allah wants them to disbelieve and end up in painful doom. |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Ok, let's take the story of Genesis for example. By your definiton, a person who does not accept that the story of Genesis is a legitimate historical fact written by god himself is a disbeliever. Wow, gee, Ratzinger should get himself a new job then!
Or let's see, a quick quote from the Kuran (which didn't take a long time to search since it's already in the 2nd chapter)
Yup, don't bother to turn disbelievers into believers because Allah wants them to disbelieve and end up in painful doom. |
That's not really a good argument as religious texts are subject to interpretation and can't always be interpreted literally, like you would a scientific journal for example. Plus, you have to read eveything in context. Various surahs (chapters) of the Quran were revealed to Muhammad in different circumstances and in order to understand what they mean, you have to keep in mind their context aswell. The standard ordering of the Surah's is not even the order in which each surah was revealed.
And you didn't answer my question (I was being serious), define a fundamentalist for me. And then a "normal religious person" too. And then a fanatic or extremest. I honestly want on know how you define these terms.
EDIT: I'm not trying to get a rise out of you or anything Drug_Tito, I just want to understand your positon and why you made the comment you did earlier. |
|
|
| DrUg_Tit0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
That's not really a good argument as religious texts are subject to interpretation and can't always be interpreted literally, like you would a scientific journal for example. Plus, you have to read eveything in context. Various surahs (chapters) of the Quran were revealed to Muhammad in different circumstances and in order to understand what they mean, you have to keep in mind their context aswell. The standard ordering of the Surah's is not even the order in which each surah was revealed.
[quote]And you didn't answer my question (I was being serious), define a fundamentalist for me. And then a "normal religious person" too. And then a fanatic or extremest. I honestly want on know how you define these terms. |
Well, basically I guess you could say that a fundamentalist person is the one who clinges to the teachings written down in whatever book that person considers holy without considering the possibility that some of those teachings may be either archaic, incorrect, or simply outdated and no longer relevant. Admittedly, I have not studied Kuran and I can't really say much about it, but a similar parallel may be found in Levictus which is basically full of nonsense and savagery. A fanatic or extremist would then be a person who tries to force his fundamentalist views upon others.
The eating of the pork I mentioned earlier is an example of such a rediculous teaching. That command was inserted because pigs share many diseases with human beings, and are therefore prone to spread them around if they live in filthy conditions. Additionally at a time it was believed they could transmit leprosy. Nowadays sanitary conditions are pretty high and we know that pigs can't transmit leprosy, so therefore the commandment is both incorrect and obsolete. Therefore anyone who still clinges on to that command is not a rational person. |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
So now finally 3 months or so after Denmark, a Swedish newspaper published some of the pictures, and the debate is in its full swing here too :)
And I must say it pisses me off more and more for each day... Those who don't believe in free speech defently don't belong in our free societies... |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
shaolin_Z: I don't think I've ever seen you type so much. Ever.
that's not a bad thing... ;) |
|
|
| InterMilan31 |
Lets put this in perspective:
I dont know who Mohammad is specificly but lets say he is the Jesus to the Christians k...
If any Christian had seen an episode of Family Guy or anything that pokes fun of Jesus do you see them go crazy as some of these radical muslims do ex: dutch radio/movie/artist |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
So now finally 3 months or so after Denmark, a Swedish newspaper published some of the pictures, and the debate is in its full swing here too :) |
A paper in Norway has done the same. In Denmark things have moved onto a hillarious level now: A local muslim group has travelled the middle east to drum up antipathy for Denmark in general, using lies and red herrings. Consequently, the leader of our far-right party, always looking for more racist voters, went out and labelled them traitors, and was then reported to the police by the head of muslim organization. Meanwhile, the UN has scolded Denmark, blatantly ignoring the fact that it thereby also criticises free speech - something it hold in high regard elsewhere - and Jyllandsposten has started printing Muhammed pictures whenever it feels like it. Furthermore, it has printed a (long) letter from a very devout Muslim in Cairo (who apparently has nothing better to do with his time than writing insane letters of threat to foreign newspapers), which is of course a deliberate attempt by Jyllandsposten to fan the fires, and thereby creating more debate around the issue of free speech in a climate of political correctness and free speech.
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
And I must say it pisses me off more and more for each day... Those who don't believe in free speech defently don't belong in our free societies... |
It's been quite funny to see how the humanistic radicals, who throughout the 30's to 80's where the driving force for a more free society, have had difficulties in reacting to the debate. At one hand they are far-wing leftists and traditionally oppose the right-of-center Jyllandsposten, but at the other hand they have always praised the provocation as a basic mover of boundaries within society. Right now they seem to have settled for something along the lines of "Jyllandsposten has the right to do whatever it wants, but it shouldn't have done what it did", which to me makes no sense unless they post-fix it with a disclaimer: "according to my personal moral beliefs". |
|
|
| trancaholic |
| quote: | Originally posted by InterMilan31
Lets put this in perspective:
I dont know who Mohammad is specificly but lets say he is the Jesus to the Christians k...
If any Christian had seen an episode of Family Guy or anything that pokes fun of Jesus do you see them go crazy as some of these radical muslims do ex: dutch radio/movie/artist |
A retired priest in Denmark made the same point. He pointed out that he had noticed pictures of Jesus with a boner, and that some of the late 60's art movies, had been highly blasphemous of the church, yet no-one had issued death threats back then. Furthermore, I saw some muslim youths on TV who said that the offense was so great that it transpired to them making fun of our royal family. To this the reply was "please do - we've been laughing at them for years". |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
A retired priest in Denmark made the same point. He pointed out that he had noticed pictures of Jesus with a boner, and that some of the late 60's art movies, had been highly blasphemous of the church, yet no-one had issued death threats back then. Furthermore, I saw some muslim youths on TV who said that the offense was so great that it transpired to them making fun of our royal family. To this the reply was "please do - we've been laughing at them for years". |
:haha: |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
shaolin_Z: I don't think I've ever seen you type so much. Ever.
that's not a bad thing... ;) |
Haha. You're right, I just went back and took a look at my responses. I pulled a Mister_Opus in this thread. :nervous: :p |
|
|
| InterMilan31 |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
A retired priest in Denmark made the same point. He pointed out that he had noticed pictures of Jesus with a boner, and that some of the late 60's art movies, had been highly blasphemous of the church, yet no-one had issued death threats back then. Furthermore, I saw some muslim youths on TV who said that the offense was so great that it transpired to them making fun of our royal family. To this the reply was "please do - we've been laughing at them for years". |
thats what Im saying here...most if not 99% of the Muslim religion is very outdated and old and hasnt progressed with modern times. That is the only problem I have with the religion. Nowadays in Europe(yes in europe which is becoming very overpopulated with Muslims) you cant say anything about their religion anything and in some places like in english schools where they insist on wearing their head dresses for girls they dont conform to their rules |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
That's not really a good argument as religious texts are subject to interpretation and can't always be interpreted literally, like you would a scientific journal for example. Plus, you have to read eveything in context. Various surahs (chapters) of the Quran were revealed to Muhammad in different circumstances and in order to understand what they mean, you have to keep in mind their context aswell. The standard ordering of the Surah's is not even the order in which each surah was revealed. |
who can honestly say he knows the context to these ancient writings? (all of them, not just the quran) |
|
|
|
|
