*SNIP* warns of future attacks if Muhammad is mocked

seanaway

namloc1980 wrote: »

Jehovah being God was pretty fond of a bit of mass murder and regular genocides especially in the Torah (old testament).

Are you referring to an act of god or the act of a prophet?

RainMaker

kingchess wrote: »

Heard the tale end of an interview on REDfm between some spokesman for Islam and that bollix Neil Prenderville,crazy stuff,sodomy and adultery would be punished by death if we are under sharia law etc, But how representable are these spokesmen of the every day views of 1.8 billion Muslims?? are they a bit like a Catholic Bishop insisting that Church law is above Irish law??

Just read the article in the Irish Times (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/us-use-of-shannon-airport-makes-ireland-a-target-anjem-choudary-1.2060258)

Curious why this didn't fall under the auld Section 31 of the Broadcasting act which prevented any direct quotes from Sinn Fein for years (not a Sinn Fein supported, just curious why the same doesn't apply here...) Remember when Gerry Adams had to be dubbed on BBC for example?

Former minister for communications once instructed RTE not to broadcast anything which fell under the following guidelines:

"any matter that could be calculated to promote the aims or activities of any organisation which engages in, promotes, encourages or advocates the attaining of any particular objectives by violent means."

seanaway

RainMaker wrote: »

Just read the article in the Irish Times (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/us-use-of-shannon-airport-makes-ireland-a-target-anjem-choudary-1.2060258)

Curious why this didn't fall under the auld Section 31 of the Broadcasting act which prevented any direct quotes from Sinn Fein for years (not a Sinn Fein supported, just curious why the same doesn't apply here...) Remember when Gerry Adams had to be dubbed on BBC for example?

Former minister for communications once instructed RTE not to broadcast anything which fell under the following guidelines:

"any matter that could be calculated to promote the aims or activities of any organisation which engages in, promotes, encourages or advocates the attaining of any particular objectives by violent means."

Never really worked and the whole thing was justs illy. Better to take their residency off them and send them to sandland - it is what they think is a great place from what they say so I'm sure they'd be happy living under sharia law - unless they're into sodomy etc.. in whch case...

mr67stag

Sharia law looks pretty tempting firstly you will live in a place /country where the sun will shine all everyday hence no expensive heating bills.
Women are not allowed to drive.
Sand everywhere so the kids have sand and sun to play in and if you are lucky there will be beach nearby.
One of your civic duties is to throw stones at women convicted of adultrey ,so in essence this is sharia laws multicutural intragration ,as you will be observing a christian commandment regarding adultrey.
You can have seven wives.
You can make a bold fashion statement by not having a moustache.
Thieves have thier hans chopped so no thieves in your midsts.
A full time job in the moral police is a pretty cushy job a pays well.
The weekend starts thursday as you get friday or a large part of it off for prayers.
You will never forget it time for prayers as the iman is automated so to speak.
I suppose it has a two downsides i can think of one being burkinis and another small one is if you want to express a view point thats not allowed you will be imprisoned tortured and killed but apart from that i cant see any other downside.

seanaway

I suppose it has a two downsides i can think of one being burkinis........

Would that be like a two piece burka worn on the beach you mentioned?

bjork

Are burkinis not a bit tight?


I prefer the over coats I saw them wearing in the sea in Tunisia. Much better!

The Saint

seanaway wrote: »

I would like to have seen at least the Palestinians out showing some sympathy for those who tried to help them. But it seems that just isn't going to happen is it?

You clearly weren't paying very close attention then.

Palestinians gather in Ramallah, Gaza to support France

Hundreds of Palestinians in Ramallah and Gaza City on Sunday participated in rallies in solidarity with France in light of the spate of attacks last week.

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=753154

Abbas: Paris Terror Attack a 'Heinous Crime'

PA condemns the terrorist on the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine, says it is in contradiction of religion and morality.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/189649#.VLo1iEeUeSo

Hamas has condemned the Charlie Hebdo massacre after the Israeli Prime Minister drew parallels between the shooting and the group’s firing of rockets into Israel from the Gaza strip.

A statement from the Islamist group to news agency AFP said it “condemns the attack against Charlie Hebdo magazine and insists on the fact that differences of opinion and thought cannot justify murder”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/paris-attacks-hamas-condemns-charlie-hebdo-massacre-after-netanyahu-makes-comparison-to-gaza-rockets-9970096.html

Grayson

drumswan wrote: »

And pretty sure Allah and Jehovah are the same (fictional) chap, Jesus and Mohammed are considered divine prophets in Islam

And a lot of the worst rules in Islam were nicked from the Bible/Torah.

Grayson

seanaway wrote: »

Tempted to do the 'He said Jehovah - stome him' piece but

The difference between the two is that Jehovah did not kill - Mohammad killed all over the place. In fact was something of a warmonger according to the koran.

Jehovah committed all kinds of atrocities. He wiped out every living thing on earth except for Noah and his boat.

http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=21

1. God drowns the whole earth.
In Genesis 7:21-23, God drowns the entire population of the earth: men, women, children, fetuses, and perhaps unicorns. Only a single family survives. In Matthew 24:37-42, gentle Jesus approves of this genocide and plans to repeat it when he returns.

2. God kills half a million people.
In 2 Chronicles 13:15-18, God helps the men of Judah kill 500,000 of their fellow Israelites.

3. God slaughters all Egyptian firstborn.
In Exodus 12:29, God the baby-killer slaughters all Egyptian firstborn children and cattle because their king was stubborn.

4. God kills 14,000 people for complaining that God keeps killing them.
In Numbers 16:41-49, the Israelites complain that God is killing too many of them. So, God sends a plague that kills 14,000 more of them.

5. Genocide after genocide after genocide.
In Joshua 6:20-21, God helps the Israelites destroy Jericho, killing “men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.” In Deuteronomy 2:32-35, God has the Israelites kill everyone in Heshbon, including children. In Deuteronomy 3:3-7, God has the Israelites do the same to the people of Bashan. In Numbers 31:7-18, the Israelites kill all the Midianites except for the virgins, whom they take as spoils of war. In 1 Samuel 15:1-9, God tells the Israelites to kill all the Amalekites – men, women, children, infants, and their cattle – for something the Amalekites’ ancestors had done 400 years earlier.

If anyone, Christian, Muslim or Jew took that kind of sh1t seriously the could really justify just about any kind of atrocity.

mr67stag

Focus on the positives not the nagatives of burkinis and free speech.
No expensive tution fees for your daughters , they are not allowed eduaction.
Relegion of islam is Forever safe as changing relegion is considered treason and punished by death.
Those pesky jehovanah witnesses will never call to your house again.
Chasity of your children is safe as pre maritial sex is punished by 100 lashes.
No rowdy late night behaviour from drunk revellers as both drink and socialising are banned.
You can have a portable holiday home AKA haram like col Gadaffi RIP had ,Tony blair thought it was very nice when he visited his old mate in the desert.
If you want eternity in paradise with 40 virgins blow yourself, as well as others with you of course.

I could go on and on but maybe these guys who want us to live under sharia are just not selling the message.they just need some PR men to put a spin on it i am thinking
Frank Flannery or PJ mara.

seanaway

Grayson wrote: »

Jehovah committed all kinds of atrocities. He wiped out every living thing on earth except for Noah and his boat.

http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=21



If anyone, Christian, Muslim or Jew took that kind of sh1t seriously the could really justify just about any kind of atrocity.

I won't argue with what you say but let's get real with your source material....

I have no doubt I could find a site thatt would say the COMPLETE opposite to what you have posted and quote it as *REAL* info.


Quote from the Torah/Bible/Koran but not some site you like...

Come back and then you might be taken seriously....

irish coldplayer

seanaway wrote: »

I won't argue with what you say but let's get real with your source material....

I have no doubt I could find a site thatt would say the COMPLETE opposite to what you have posted and quote it as *REAL* info.


Quote from the Torah/Bible/Koran but not some site you like...

Come back and then you might be taken seriously....

I really don't see your problem with this.

The source material is from an Atheist website which is quite obvious when you follow the link, and granted they are coming at it from a particular viewpoint i.e. religion is nonsense.

However each story they describe has a link to the exact passage of the bible which describes it.
They link directly to biblegateway.com which if you look at it is hardly a secular or atheist website.
It is a site devoted to the study of the bible and Christianity and includes sections such as "discover Gods heart" etc.

So when you ask them to quote directly from the Bible/Torah/Koran, they already have, you just didn't follow the links.

nick 56

I was just reading this thread and realised that it proves the value of anonymity on internet debate sites.

Small point but this was a subject of debate in my house in relation to SJWs etc.

seanaway

irish coldplayer wrote: »

I really don't see your problem with this.

The source material is from an Atheist website which is quite obvious when you follow the link, and granted they are coming at it from a particular viewpoint i.e. religion is nonsense.

However each story they describe has a link to the exact passage of the bible which describes it.
They link directly to biblegateway.com which if you look at it is hardly a secular or atheist website.
It is a site devoted to the study of the bible and Christianity and includes sections such as "discover Gods heart" etc.

So when you ask them to quote directly from the Bible/Torah/Koran, they already have, you just didn't follow the links.

The problem is that anyone can take anything from any long book, out of context,a nd then provide an 'interpretation' to fit as needs be.

This is why this thread is here. Some nuts took a piece from the Koran, decided it said it was ok to do just about anything they wanted to do and then went off and did it.

You will no doubt find good and bad in and out of religion. The issue is not to quote what suits.

Piliger

seanaway wrote: »

This is why this thread is here. Some nuts took a piece from the Koran, decided it said it was ok to do just about anything they wanted to do and then went off and did it.

You will no doubt find good and bad in and out of religion. The issue is not to quote what suits.

I don't believe you are fully right in this. The issue is not just that they "took a piece from the Koran, decided it said it was ok to do just about anything they wanted to do and then went off and did it" and that this can be done for every religion.
The problem that some people, me included, have with Islam is that the whole thing is a quagmire of scripture ... a buffet of hate for anyone choosing to make that choice. Every piece of 'scripture' is as valid as any other, according to Islam.

As least in catholicism and most other main stream christianity there is a central authority that is seen by almost the whole of their members as representing and conferring legitimacy. so when someone picks out something from the old testament for example, it simply won't wash as a claim to represent christianity.

In Islam this is not the case. There is no central decider of legitimacy, no authority, no arbiter of what is acceptable or not.