Show of HandsShow of Hands

stinomite May 24th, 2017 8:54pm

Our freedom of speech is limited in cases when the speech directly harms others (e.g. slander). If practicing Islam faithfully requires violence against infidels, then should our right to practice religion be limited to exclude violent religions?

5 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

commonsense America isnt racist
05/24/17 10:47 pm

The actions of Muslims murdering people proves Islam is not peaceful.

The Koran can be interpreted many ways. The people that murder there interpret it as violent. It is what it is.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 4:12 pm

Islam doesn't promote violence, so yes, it should be legal.

Reply
stinomite
05/24/17 4:57 pm

Really?? Really??? Wow. Muhammad was a woman-beating, lying, murderous child-rapist. Most Christians ask the question "What would Jesus do" as a guiding principle. If one were to live like Muhammad, they'd go to straight to hell in most honest people's most liberal belief systems.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 5:14 pm

" Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves".
Numbers 31:18

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 5:21 pm

Muhammad didn't beat his wives, lie, or rape children.

stinomite
05/24/17 5:28 pm

Nice try, but Numbers is part of The Old Testament before Jesus' time. I'm comparing the teachings of Jesus and his actions to those of Muhammad. The Old Testament is included in the Bible as a way to tell the story of the history of The Jews prior to the arrival of Jesus. Before Jesus, God was much more unforgiving and people had to make many sacrifices. The arrival of Jesus changed all that.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 5:32 pm

And according to the bible, the virgin Mary was married and had jesus at the ripe old age of 14

stinomite
05/24/17 5:33 pm

www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/articles/jesus-muhammad.aspx

Have fun reading through this list!! While you're at check out some of the horrifying stats about terrorism carried out by "The Religion of Peace". Seriously, everyone should be reading this. I seriously doubted Muhammad could be this bad at first and still be the prophet of one of the world's major religions. Man was I wrong!

stinomite
05/24/17 5:35 pm

You do realize that Christians follow the New Testament right? The Old Testament was an account of god BEFORE Jesus.

stinomite
05/24/17 5:40 pm

Muhammad took a nine year old wife. I know women married in their teens back in the day, but this should qualify as child rape even by 7th century standards.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 5:48 pm

The religion of peace website is propaganda. They distort the truth. Read the actual religious texts.

Aisha may not have been 9, but you also have to look at culture. It was a different time.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 5:49 pm

I think the issue youre not understanding here is that just because there isn't a formal division between "old testament" and "new testament" doesnt mean such a division doesnt exist. Its the same with judaism, you don't see jews giving animal sacrifice and stoning women of adultery.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 5:51 pm

Jesus didn't come to abolish the law but to fulfill it.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 7:12 pm

All stinomite did was drop an an article from a known anti-Islam website, as if that counts as proof of anything.

doober72 Vidalia, Ga.
05/24/17 7:13 pm

It's kind of hard to believe that when ALL terrorists attacks are committed by the Muslim faith. Wrap your brain around that and the tell us its a "peaceful" religion. It just doesn't add up.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:15 pm

All terrorist attacks aren't carried out in the name of Islam though.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:16 pm

Christians in africa demolished all mosques in the central African republic and have beheaded thousands of nonchristians

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 7:17 pm

The Lord's Resistance Army 🤢

CoffeeNow Powderpuff Leftist
05/24/17 2:19 pm

As someone who thinks Islam is a shitstain on the pants of civilization, no. I support freedom to practice whatever religion, peacefully

Reply
stinomite
05/24/17 5:11 pm

Islam can't be practiced peacefully so long as there are infidels. Any other religious practice is NOT Islam. Islam needs a reformation to remove the whole part about killing non-believers. If Islam were the way and its followers believed it to be the truth, it should sell itself. It shouldn't require oppression and violence.

CoffeeNow Powderpuff Leftist
05/24/17 5:15 pm

Technically you're right, but there are billions of people who call themselves Muslims who are peaceful. So whatever they are, they should be allowed to do that

funlover heart of it all
05/24/17 2:16 pm

Violent actions should not be permitted, no matter what the religion.

Reply
RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 2:13 pm

Christianity also says to murder people.

Reply
RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 3:25 pm

If you're saying Islam should be banned because it talks about violence, so should christianity

ProudAmerican45 North Joisey
05/24/17 4:03 pm

I've been going to Mass everyday for the last 5 yrs..and not once in the Priests homily has he ever instructed us to go out and kill the non-believers..has never suggested violence toward any group of people..no hate speech..just peace

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 4:06 pm

Point me to an American mosque that does.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 4:13 pm

Raging's last comment hit the nail on the head. Shut fundamentalist mosques and churches down. That shit is dangerous.

ProudAmerican45 North Joisey
05/24/17 4:16 pm

Can you explain to me why NO Imams or Clerics have come out publicly to denounce all attacks in the name of their peaceful religion? Or why not ONE Ambassador in the U.S. of any Muslim country has spoken out? Or why not ONE Muslim leader that was in Saudi Arabia over the weekend hasn't spoken out?

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 4:20 pm

I don't know what you're talking about. My imam does regularly. Come by some time.

ProudAmerican45 North Joisey
05/24/17 4:27 pm

Publicly on television..not in the confines of a Mosque..I don't go to a mosque because I'm a non-believer so how would I know what they say? You didn't answer my question why no one prominent from the faith has spoken out publicly for the world to hear..

stinomite
05/24/17 5:06 pm

If one were to study Jesus' teachings across all of the New Testament, one can overwhelming conclude Jesus advocated kindness, forgiveness and love. He would try and teach about god to all that listened, and he didn't advocate lying to, stealing from and murdering non believers. Christianity requires free will - you have to accept Christ on your own. Not because you're under the threat of beheading.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 5:10 pm

Islam is the same way if you actually read all of it instead of hearing one mistranslated quote and stereotyping an entire culture

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 5:18 pm

That's miniscule percentages of the population. And "church militant" sure is a totally nonbiased and reliable source

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 5:21 pm

Stinomite, I agree. Muslims respect Jesus as much as we respect Muhammad.

ProudAmerican45 North Joisey
05/24/17 5:30 pm

One is even to many..then there's the high percentages that said they don't know when asked the question..

Desensitized
05/24/17 7:12 pm

Back to mosques supporting terrorism, the mosque that the san Bernardino shooter went to knew about and witnessed arms deals and ignored it. Mosques often are like ghetto families: they would turn you in out of being afraid of being accused of being involved but never out of safety of the public.
Most mosques arent like this, but no churches come close to this unless theyre basically armories not churches, and even then its just libertarianism toward gun laws.
Finally, Jesus was a bottom up prophet. Mohammad was a top down dictator. He also caused a war between his own people through his death, which is modern day sunnis and shiites. Islam didnt advocate violence? Then how do you explain mohammads army?

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 7:24 pm

Muhammad was not a dictator. His army responded to attacks against them by neighboring armies, it was not in the search for imperial conquest. It was a populist movement of liberation from economic and political elites, and instituted the first major welfare state in the world.

The Sunni-Shi'ite divide is not at all Muhammad's fault. It exists because of disagreement among the Muslim community as to how Muhammad's successor should be.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:29 pm

And you act like Christianity didnt have a whole series of wars abput killing anyone who didnt believe and even a bunch who did

Desensitized
05/24/17 7:31 pm

Basically "Islams violence is justified"

Desensitized
05/24/17 7:34 pm

The Crusades were retaliation to muslim invasions and natural disaster. That wasnt even justified violence, that was states reclaiming lands for the religious peoples. They also had no religious value considering there's no new prophets or anything.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:35 pm

No, Islam's violence was a product of the violent times, not Islam. Because its seen in other major religions as well.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:36 pm

The cruisaides were "retaliation" to Muslims expanding into other people's territory, unrelated to the christians. Its like saying the vietnam war was "retaliation".

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:37 pm

And basically "Christianity's violence is justified"

Desensitized
05/24/17 7:39 pm

So Roman genocide isnt "violent times?" Christianity rose up as a nonviolent religion and became violent during times of great power. Islam was violent from the start and only becomes peaceful once successful secular countries allow it, like Syria 8 years ago.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:41 pm

So basically, you're saying Christianity's violence doesn't count for some reason?

Desensitized
05/24/17 7:42 pm

Also, that vietnam war thing made no sense. A better comparison is Nazi Germany reclaiming the fatherland. Except war to reclaim land just for state reasons has no justification, while the Crusades were to end the dark ages and reclaim lands invaded by muslims.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:43 pm

Except that land wasnt theirs.

Desensitized
05/24/17 7:44 pm

The Crusades were reclaiming land already belonging to them. Islam starts violence without ever having anything stolen from them. War is not violence. Rebellion is violence. Jesus was against rebellion.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:45 pm

"War is not violence" wew lad

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 7:45 pm

The American Revolution was a rebellion, was it not?

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:45 pm

And no, the land didnt belong to them. It belonged to the turks.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
05/24/17 7:46 pm

War is not violence, okay. So Islam isn't violent because it defends itself in battle.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:49 pm

And that's not even mentioning the Spanish inquisition and all the terrible, terrible things they did

Desensitized
05/24/17 7:56 pm

Islam isnt violent if its defending itself, thats pretty obvious.
All know is that Jesus died and everywhere was either Christian or Jewish and then the Turks started invading Byzantium and Europe. Christians and Jews had owned the lands but then they were fought and kicked out. The Arabic golden age was the time right after capturing libraries across the middle east.
Also, the American Revolution was complicated because there was essentially no leader to rebel against other than a country 6 months away. But yes, it was a rebellion.

Desensitized
05/24/17 7:57 pm

Spanish inquisition isnt really explainable today. It wasnt really christian, it was a state thing about getting mad at muslim mass migration.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 7:59 pm

"The Inquisition was originally intended primarily to ensure the orthodoxy of those who converted from Judaism and Islam. The regulation of the faith of the newly converted was intensified after the royal decrees issued in 1492 and 1502 ordering Jews and Muslims to convert or leave Spain."

Desensitized
05/24/17 8:11 pm

Notice the term royal? Christianity was essentially against Royalty throughout history, and then suddenly Royals started acknowledging Christianity. Not exactly Christianity doing this, its higher powers. If Trump said we all have to become Christians, is that a huge Christian movement or just state policy?

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 8:12 pm

Notice the phrase "preserve orthodoxy"? So yes, it is a christian movement

Desensitized
05/24/17 8:13 pm

Nobody at the time was thinking highly of the spanish royalty other than the spanish and not as christians.

Desensitized
05/24/17 8:15 pm

The Jews can have an inquisition to get rid of islam to preserve orthodox christianity too. Or just some random royals who are pagan and dislike change.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/24/17 8:16 pm

But its to preserve christianity, meaning its a Christian movement

Desensitized
05/24/17 8:22 pm

Preservation is never a religious argument. That is completely state based and decided by Royals who arent even Christian themselves. Popes arent even Christian for half of history because theyre pagan romans.

RagingMystic covfefe
05/25/17 6:27 am

Uh, yeah, preservation of a religion is definitely a religious action.