Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

''Islam is a religion of peace'' (debate)

1…910121415…24

Comments

  • #332
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    Eh no ... YOU yourself put the word Islam there - not me. I mentioned it in a general context.

    Stop lieing.

    Your post was a direct response to my post which asked you:
    dlofnep wrote:
    Deravarra - do you condemn all Islamic nations that punish blasphemy? Do you believe that anyone has the right to insult Allah and Muhammad if they so desire, without reprisal?

    So - It was quite clear that you were responding to a post discussing irrational responses by Islam towards those who embrace their right to free speech.


  • #333
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    dlofnep - you've made a number of accusations against me and my character here. I'd like you to retract them all and apologize.

    Maybe you think it ok to insult me with these accusations - your right to "free speech" - but I don't... and I'm sure you wouldnt like to be labelled with any accusation which you know to be untrue.

    So do the honourable thing and withdraw the accusations

    There is no right to free speech on boards.ie - Moderators can choose what posts they wish to permit. As I have yet been approached by a moderator for my posts, I will take it in good faith that they have taken no issue with them.

    Bearing in mind, this is what you posted:
    Would I stand up for their right to be as beligerent and demeaning to the sensitivities of those who hold those places sacred and dear to them? Absolutely not! Would they deserve whatever action would befall them should they choose to express their "right" to insult? a big YES from me.

    This rubbish of having the right to insult is a load of tosh.

    Why would anyone want to insult? Do it, and you get what you deserve.

    This was directly in response to my hypothetical question of insulting Islam. You stated that I 'get what I deserve'. Therefore, you have quite clearly demonstrated that you support and apologise for irrational responses by fanatical muslims.

    If you have an issue with my posts - report them to a moderator. Don't ask me for an apology on here because you've tripped up over your own posts, and are now upset that I have called you on them.


  • #334
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    Stop lieing.

    Your post was a direct response to my post which asked you:



    So - It was quite clear that you were responding to a post discussing irrational responses by Islam towards those who embrace their right to free speech.

    You are being a conniving devious islamophobe.

    You are the liar here bud!

    I made very clear in my response what i was referring to. Let me repeat it again, using BOLD for the bits you seemed to gloss over or ignore - quite conveniently.

    I'd love to see how you would be treated at the war memorial in washington should you start roaring and shouting obscenities about the brutality of the american regime in the vietnamese conflict - or decide to do the same at the senotaph in london, or the tomb of the unknown soldier in paris...
    Let's see how long you would last without getting an almighty beating

    Would I stand up for their right to be as beligerent and demeaning to the sensitivities of those who hold those places sacred and dear to them? Absolutely not! Would they deserve whatever action would befall them should they choose to express their "right" to insult? a big YES from me.

    This rubbish of having the right to insult is a load of tosh.

    Why would anyone want to insult? Do it, and you get what you deserve. If anyone insulted me, my family or showed any disrespect to them, I would do the same. Of course, I would be nice first, and ask them to desist. If they chose to ignore the plea, then they shouldnt go crying foul.

    Quite clearly I stated, using the washington war memorial, the senotaph and the tomb of the unknown soldier in paris ... that someone who insulted these places probably would get a good beating, and I wouldnt object to it.

    I then stated that those who insulted what was sacred and dear to others got what they deserved. That was in the context of the previous paragraph. Not once did I mention Islam. Not Once. But somehow, with your pathologic twisted logic, you somehow fashioned me into a supporter of fanatical islamic violence.

    Why the hell are you a moderator?


  • #335
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    This was directly in response to my hypothetical question of insulting Islam. You stated that I 'get what I deserve'. Therefore, you have quite clearly demonstrated that you support and apologise for irrational responses by fanatical muslims.

    Utter Bull!

    How the hell could anyone with half a brain deduce that outcome?


  • #336
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    Utter Bull!

    How the hell could anyone with half a brain deduce that outcome?

    Because you responded directly to my question which asked you:
    dlofnep wrote:
    Deravarra - do you condemn all Islamic nations that punish blasphemy? Do you believe that anyone has the right to insult Allah and Muhammad if they so desire, without reprisal?

    You ended your post in response to it stating:
    Why would anyone want to insult? Do it, and you get what you deserve.

    Therefore, you have demonstrated support of fanatical Islam. It's quite evident to me, and probably many others.


  • Advertisement
  • #337
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    Because you responded directly to my question which asked you:



    You ended your post in response to it stating:



    Therefore, you have demonstrated support of fanatical Islam. It's quite evident to me, and probably many others.

    You quite conveniently ignore the posting in its entirety, and cherry pick the bits and pieces you wish to espouse a theory which is built on a BS foundation.

    Point out where I specifically stated I support Islamic violence? I didnt.
    So withdraw your accusation!


  • #338
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    You are being a conniving devious islamophobe.

    That's quite a statement. I will take it as a compliment.
    deravarra wrote: »
    Quite clearly I stated, using the washington war memorial, the senotaph and the tomb of the unknown soldier in paris ... that someone who insulted these places probably would get a good beating, and I wouldnt object to it.

    I then stated that those who insulted what was sacred and dear to others got what they deserved. That was in the context of the previous paragraph. Not once did I mention Islam. Not Once. But somehow, with your pathologic twisted logic, you somehow fashioned me into a supporter of fanatical islamic violence.

    Which would have been fine in dandy if it wasn't in response to my hypothetical question which directly addressed Islam. I quite clearly asked you: "Deravarra - do you condemn all Islamic nations that punish blasphemy? Do you believe that anyone has the right to insult Allah and Muhammad if they so desire, without reprisal?"

    In a direct response, you ended your post:
    deravarra wrote:
    Why would anyone want to insult? Do it, and you get what you deserve.
    deravarra wrote: »
    Why the hell are you a moderator?

    It's something us 'conniving devious islamophobes' get as a reward for our duties.


  • #339
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    Point out where I specifically stated I support Islamic violence? I didnt.
    So withdraw your accusation!

    You had your opportunity to condemn Islamic violence when I asked you
    dlofnep wrote:
    Deravarra - do you condemn all Islamic nations that punish blasphemy? Do you believe that anyone has the right to insult Allah and Muhammad if they so desire, without reprisal?

    Not once did you condemn it, and not once did you state that someone has the right to insult Allah/Muhammad without reprisal. Instead, you went off on a rant to inform us that if someone insults an ideology - they get what they deserve. That much is very much quite apparent to everyone else in this thread, except you.

    The accusation stands. Unless of course you want to revise your answer to my above question and condemn those in Islam who use violence as a response to insults, and acknowledge that someone should have the right to insult Allah without reprisal. If you cannot do both of the above, you will receive no retraction from me.


  • #340
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    That's quite a statement. I will take it as a compliment.



    Which would have been fine in dandy if it wasn't in response to my hypothetical question which directly addressed Islam. I quite clearly asked you: "Deravarra - do you condemn all Islamic nations that punish blasphemy? Do you believe that anyone has the right to insult Allah and Muhammad if they so desire, without reprisal?"





    It's something us 'conniving devious islamophobes' get as a reward for our duties.

    Do you have a problem with comprehension?

    I didnt answer your question directly. I stayed away from it. I made a general observation about insults in general. I never alluded in any way to islam or those who insult islam.

    But you, somehow, managed to eek out from my reply that i supported fanatical islamic violence.

    All your responses to my denial of your pathetic accusation have just ended with you being unable to prove I am what you accuse me of being, but you still persist.

    You, sir, are a conniving and devious islamophobe.

    Withdraw your accusations against me.


  • #341
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    You, sir, are a conniving and devious islamophobe.

    So you keep telling me.
    deravarra wrote: »
    Withdraw your accusations against me.

    As soon as you revise your answer, I'll be more than happy to.


  • Advertisement
  • #342
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    You had your opportunity to condemn Islamic violence when I asked you



    Not once did you condemn it, and not once did you state that someone has the right to insult Allah/Muhammad without reprisal. Instead, you went off on a rant to inform us that if someone insults an ideology - they get what they deserve. That much is very much quite apparent to everyone else in this thread, except you.

    The accusation stands. Unless of course you want to revise your answer to my above question and condemn those in Islam who use violence as a response to insults, and acknowledge that someone should have the right to insult Allah without reprisal. If you cannot do both of the above, you will receive no retraction from me.


    What kind of totally twisted logic is that?

    Because I didnt condemn it and because i didnt support the "right" to insult Allah/Muhammed without reprisal, I must be a supporter of fanatical islamic violence...

    what kind of dimwit reasoning is that?


  • #343
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    What kind of totally twisted logic is that?

    Because I didnt condemn it and because i didnt support the "right" to insult Allah/Muhammed without reprisal, I must be a supporter of fanatical islamic violence...

    what kind of dimwit reasoning is that?

    So are you willing to revise your answer?


  • #344
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    So you keep telling me.



    As soon as you revise your answer, I'll be more than happy to.

    Why the hell should I revise anything? You read something into my reply which was not there at all.

    You came up with BS reasoning and made a stupid dimwitted accusation.

    You have no proof whatsoever to back up your accusation, and being a stubborn git wont admit your mistake and withdraw the accusation.


  • #345
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    So are you willing to revise your answer?

    Did i say I supported islamic violence? No


  • #346
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    Why the hell should I revise anything? You read something into my reply which was not there at all.

    You came up with BS reasoning and made a stupid dimwitted accusation.

    You have no proof whatsoever to back up your accusation, and being a stubborn git wont admit your mistake and withdraw the accusation.

    Tsk tsk. When you wish to revise your answer, I'll be happy to withdraw my comments. Until then, don't bother me with silly requests.

    Also a point to note, personal attacks are generally not tolerated by moderators. You might want to edit that 'git' comment. It doesn't bother me personally, but it does break the rules of the forum. Friendly advice :)


  • #347
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    deravarra wrote: »
    Ah I see ... and Fred Phelps will tell you that he and his followers act in the name of God while hurling insults towards those attending soldiers funerals.

    I'll be looking forward to you castigating all christians for this :)

    Thought I'd grab this since it seemed to have slipped by the others here - Of course all Christians should not be castigated for the bigotry of Phelps and his ilk, but Christianity in general should be criticised for allowing him a justification for his bigotry. Likewise, Islam in general should be criticised for allowing a justification for the actions of Mohammed Bouyeri.


  • #348
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,610 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    I see quite a few accusations and names being thrown about here on both sides.

    But since we're all adults here, just keep it mildly civilized and nobody needs to be reprimanded. So enjoy the freedom of speech you've all been given here (even those posters endorsing the curtailing of that right).

    And for the record, dlofnep is a hosted moderator of a Boards forum. The only moderators anyone need concern themselves with in this forum are myself or Robindch.


  • #349
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    Tsk tsk. When you wish to revise your answer, I'll be happy to withdraw my comments. Until then, don't bother me with silly requests.

    Also a point to note, personal attacks are generally not tolerated by moderators. You might want to edit that 'git' comment. It doesn't bother me personally, but it does break the rules of the forum. Friendly advice :)

    silly requests? Oh you think it's silly for me to ask you to withdraw a baseless unfounded accusation which is quite insulting?

    And you think that calling you a git is a personal attack, but you labelling me a supporter of fanatical islamic violence isnt?

    You insulted me by suggesting on a number of occasions and in a strong manner that i supported islamic violence. But you are allowed say that? Because it's free speech?

    That is the kind of crap I come across from dimwits every so often. Condemn the Israeli killing of almost 2000 people, and get called an anti semite.

    Say you wouldnt blame anyone if they beat the lard out of someone who insulted the war dead - and be called a supporter of fanatical islamic violence.

    Islamophobe. Shameful. And unabashed through it all.


  • #350
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    Thought I'd grab this since it seemed to have slipped by the others here - Of course all Christians should not be castigated for the bigotry of Phelps and his ilk, but Christianity in general should be criticised for allowing him a justification for his bigotry. Likewise, Islam in general should be criticised for allowing a justification for the actions of Mohammed Bouyeri.


    Sorry? run that by me again?

    Christianity should be criticised for allowing phelps a justification for his bigotry?
    And Islam should be criticised for allowing a justification for the actions of Mohammed Bouyeri?

    Eh .... Allowing a justification .... there was no justification in either case. the rantings of lunatics who say their actions are "in the name of ..." hold no sway, and have no justification at all.

    I'd like to see you expand on that theory :)

    Oh - and just a little bit added on ... with regards to christianity - didnt jesus say "hate the sin, but love the sinner" - no apology needed from christianity then ...
    and from the Quran: "Whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all humankind." - no apology needed from islam then :)


  • #351
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    silly requests? Oh you think it's silly for me to ask you to withdraw a baseless unfounded accusation which is quite insulting?

    I gave you the opportunity to revise your answer. You did not. I don't want to destroy this thread with such petty squabbling. Move on. If you want a withdrawal - then reply to my question correctly.
    deravarra wrote: »
    That is the kind of crap I come across from dimwits every so often. Condemn the Israeli killing of almost 2000 people, and get called an anti semite.

    As it so happens, I have been one of Israel's ardent critics here on boards. But that's here nor there.
    deravarra wrote: »
    Say you wouldnt blame anyone if they beat the lard out of someone who insulted the war dead - and be called a supporter of fanatical islamic violence.

    Yes - I would blame them. I believe in free speech, regardless of whether I agree with it or not. Nobody should ever respond to insults with violence.


  • Advertisement
  • #352
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    deravarra wrote: »
    Sorry? run that by me again?

    Christianity should be criticised for allowing phelps a justification for his bigotry?
    And Islam should be criticised for allowing a justification for the actions of Mohammed Bouyeri?

    Eh .... Allowing a justification .... there was no justification in either case. the rantings of lunatics who say their actions are "in the name of ..." hold no sway, and have no justification at all.

    I'd like to see you expand on that theory :)

    Well, there's really no expansion needed. Phelps uses his religion to justify in his own mind his bigoted attitude towards homosexuals and other human beings in general. Bouyeri used his religion to legitimise in his own mind his murder of Theo Van Gogh.

    If it weren't for Christianity, Fred Phelps would probably still be a bigot, but no-one would pay any attention to him. This is not an attack on all Christians.

    If it weren't for Islam, Mohammed Bouyeri would not have killed Theo Van Gogh. This is not an attack on all Muslims.


  • #353
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    I gave you the opportunity to revise your answer. You did not. I don't want to destroy this thread with such petty squabbling. Move on. If you want a withdrawal - then reply to my question correctly.



    As it so happens, I have been one of Israel's ardent critics here on boards. But that's here nor there.



    Yes - I would blame them. I believe in free speech, regardless of whether I agree with it or not. Nobody should ever respond to insults with violence.

    Again ... I did not make any statement of support for fanatical islamic violence. At no time did I say I supported it, nor suggested it should be done. I do not condone any such actions by anyone.

    A lack of condemnation of such actions should never be construed as support for same. That is basic common sense. It is also an accepted point of law.

    Yet despite all this, you still come out and not only suggest that I am a supporter of "fanatical islamic violence" once - but on a number of occasions despite my protestations that I am not. You became more fervent in your accusations of being such, and suggested that unless I responded in your prescribed fashion, you would not withdraw the accusation.

    Coward. Islamophobe. Devious. Conniving.

    Take them all, you deserve them - and more.


  • #354
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    Well, there's really no expansion needed. Phelps uses his religion to justify in his own mind his bigoted attitude towards homosexuals and other human beings in general. Bouyeri used his religion to legitimise in his own mind his murder of Theo Van Gogh.

    If it weren't for Christianity, Fred Phelps would probably still be a bigot, but no-one would pay any attention to him. This is not an attack on all Christians.

    If it weren't for Islam, Mohammed Bouyeri would not have killed Theo Van Gogh. This is not an attack on all Muslims.

    Using something to try and "back up" their bigotedness does not necessarily make either christianity nor islam the problem.

    If they were the problem, why arent all christians or all muslims perpatrating actions such as those of phelps or bouyeri?


  • #355
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    deravarra wrote: »
    Using something to try and "back up" their bigotedness does not necessarily make either christianity nor islam the problem.

    If they were the problem, why arent all christians or all muslims perpatrating actions such as those of phelps or bouyeri?

    Because most people aren't insane, and because religious texts such as the Bible and the Qu'ran are open to vast arrays of interpretations.


  • #356
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    Because most people aren't insane, and because religious texts such as the Bible and the Qu'ran are open to vast arrays of interpretations.

    so, the problem is not with the bible nor the qu'ran, but rather on the people who take them out of context?

    So, blame phelps for phelps and bouyeri for bouyeri?

    Or would you go down the route of condemning the Haynes for allowing some mechanical fanatic for making a mess out of modding his car, because the manual is open to interpretation?


  • #357
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    but on a number of occasions despite my protestations that I am not.

    Ok - You are not a supporter of Islamic fanatics. Now, will you finally answer my question?
    deravarra wrote: »
    Coward. Islamophobe. Devious. Conniving.

    Take them all, you deserve them - and more.

    A fine example of this tolerance you purport to have.


  • #358
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    Ok - You are not a supporter of Islamic fanatics

    Nor of their violence ....

    thank you. that's all i wanted.


    dlofnep wrote: »
    Now, will you finally answer my question?

    Do I support the right to insult God/Muhammad without fear of reprisal?

    Nothing should ever beget violence. But I do not support the right to insult anything or anyone. It demeans the right to freedom of speech. In fact, the right to insult is the right to freedom of hate speech.

    Does that make me a supporter of islamic violence?


  • #359
    deravarra
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,951 ✭✭✭deravarra


    dlofnep wrote: »
    A fine example of this tolerance you purport to have.

    Lovely :) and how tolerant you are too ... provoking, pushing, and then castigating when the desired response is received. is that an atheist/agnostic thing?


  • #360
    dlofnep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,759 ✭✭✭✭dlofnep


    deravarra wrote: »
    Do I support the right to insult God/Muhammad without fear of reprisal?

    Nothing should ever beget violence. But I do not support the right to insult anything or anyone. It demeans the right to freedom of speech.

    Once again, you do not understand what freedom of speech is. You don't have to agree with the said speech.

    Hypothesis time. Let's suppose I attack Muhammad's track record for paedophilia - Do I have the right to do this, even if it offends a muslim? And if I don't - Does the muslim have a right to call for violence against me, or engage in violence against me?


  • Advertisement
  • #361
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    deravarra wrote: »
    so, the problem is not with the bible nor the qu'ran, but rather on the people who take them out of context?

    I don't think a lack of context is the problem at all.
    So, blame phelps for phelps and bouyeri for bouyeri?

    No. As I said, Phelps without Christianity is harmless. Bouyeri without Islam is harmless.
    Or would you go down the route of condemning the Haynes for allowing some mechanical fanatic for making a mess out of modding his car, because the manual is open to interpretation?

    I don't even know what this means. What on Earth is the Haynes? I certainly don't know of any instruction manual that's as wildly inconsistent as either of the religious texts I've mentioned; in point of fact most instruction manuals I've read aren't open to any interpretation at all.

    And even if it someone did modify their own car on the basis of some misinterpretation of the instructions, of course I wouldn't condemn them because what harm would it do?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement