PDA

View Full Version : How knowlegeable of Muslims are you?



Uncle Bill
01-08-2010, 04:52 PM
Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life. Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components. Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to agitate for their religious privileges.



When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well..Here's how it works...




As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in




United States -- Muslim 0.6%




Australia -- Muslim 1.5%




Canada -- Muslim 1.9%




China -- Muslim 1.8%




Italy -- Muslim 1.5%




Norway -- Muslim 1.8%




At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs.



This is happening in:



Denmark -- Muslim 2%



Germany -- Muslim 3.7%



United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%



Spain -- Muslim 4%



Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%




From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in: Philippines -- 5%



Sweden -- Muslim 5%



Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%



The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%



Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%




At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.




When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:




India -- Muslim 13.4%




Israel -- Muslim 16%




Kenya -- Muslim 10%




Russia -- Muslim 15%




After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:




Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%




At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:



Bosnia -- Muslim 40%




Chad -- Muslim 53.1%




Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%




From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:




Albania -- Muslim 70%




Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%




Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%




Sudan -- Muslim 70%




After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:




Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%




Egypt -- Muslim 90%




Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%




Iran -- Muslim 98%




Iraq -- Muslim 97%




Jordan -- Muslim 92%




Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%




Pakistan -- Muslim 97%




Palestine -- Muslim 99%




Syria -- Muslim 90%




Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%




Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%




United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%




100% will usher in the peace of 'Dar-es-Salaam' -- the Islamic House of Peace. Here there's supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrasses are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word, such as in:




Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%




Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%




Somalia -- Muslim 100%




Yemen -- Muslim 100%




Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.




'Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel. -- Leon Uris, 'The Haj'




It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts, nor schools, nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large. The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.




Today's 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world's population. But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world's population by the end of this century.




Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond's book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat








Today we are letting the fox guard the henhouse. The wolves will be herding the sheep:
Obama Appoints two devout Muslims to homeland security posts...




Obama and Janet Napolitano Appoint Arif Alikhan, a devout Muslim as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development.




DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano swore-in Kareem Shora, a devout Muslim, who was born in Damascus, Syria as ADC National Executive Director as a member of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC).



Doesn't this make you feel safer already?




Has anyone ever heard a new government official being identified as a devout Catholic, a devout Jew or a devout protestant...?

YardleyLabs
01-08-2010, 05:08 PM
This sets a new standard for complete religious bigotry. How much do you know about any of the countries being mentioned? The author appears to know absolutely nothing and to care even less. The descriptions of problems may apply to a few countries, but don't apply at all to most. You could substitute the name of any religion, including Christianity, along with the same comments and be equally accurate in your assessments.

By the way, the overwhelming bulk of appointees in the Obama administration are Christian. That is why the small number of Muslims receive the attention they do.

Franco
01-08-2010, 06:03 PM
No doubt that our immigration laws are long overdue for an overhaul. It is looking like our next wave of immigrants(other than the Latin invasion from south of the boarder) will be from Iraq, Af'stan and Haiti(political refugees).

We are broke and can not continue to take in people that have nothing to contribute. And, we certainly don't need anymore Democrats.

I would like to see a moritorium of no further immigration! We have gotten to the point where the more people we take in, the lower our Standard Of Living. There was a time when immigration had some positives for the USA. Those positives no longer exsist.

Pete
01-08-2010, 07:54 PM
By the way, the overwhelming bulk of appointees in the Obama administration are Christian. That is why the small number of Muslims receive the attention they do

I always wonder when people cloths themselves with labels to hide their true intent
If someone one is a christian (joke word anymore) they will sort of behave like one

There are relatively few "christians" who act like christians.

It kneel ,genulflect on sunday morning and cuss ,drink and screw people the rest of the week and of course sunday afternoon.

I find labels hilarious.

Pete

YardleyLabs
01-08-2010, 08:08 PM
I always wonder when people cloths themselves with labels to hide their true intent
If someone one is a christian (joke word anymore) they will sort of behave like one

There are relatively few "christians" who act like christians.

It kneel ,genulflect on sunday morning and cuss ,drink and screw people the rest of the week and of course sunday afternoon.

I find labels hilarious.

Pete
I would have to agree with you Pete. When it comes to behaving like a good Christian (or even a good Muslim), I suspect that both politicians and media broadcasters -- radio or TV -- would both rank far below attorneys. And the least Christian among them are those who profess their beliefs the loudest.

Keith Farmer
01-08-2010, 08:22 PM
The author appears to know absolutely nothing and to care even less.




"Dr. Peter Hammond is a missionary who has pioneered evangelistic outreaches in the war zones of Mozambique, Angola and Sudan. Often travelling by off road motorbike, Peter has travelled hundreds of thousands of miles to deliver Bibles to persecuted Christians in Africa and Eastern Europe. In the course of his missionary activities Peter has been ambushed, come under aerial and artillery bombardments, been stabbed, shot at, beaten by mobs, arrested and imprisoned. On some mission trips he has flown far behind enemy lines to the beleaguered Nuba Mountains in Central Sudan with tonnes of Bibles, books and relief aid. He has then walked throughout the war devastated Nuba Mountains showing the Jesus film in Arabic, proclaiming the Gospel, training pastors and evading enemy patrols." (http://www.frontline.org.za/about_director.htm)




.

YardleyLabs
01-08-2010, 09:02 PM
"Dr. Peter Hammond is a missionary who has pioneered evangelistic outreaches in the war zones of Mozambique, Angola and Sudan. Often travelling by off road motorbike, Peter has travelled hundreds of thousands of miles to deliver Bibles to persecuted Christians in Africa and Eastern Europe. In the course of his missionary activities Peter has been ambushed, come under aerial and artillery bombardments, been stabbed, shot at, beaten by mobs, arrested and imprisoned. On some mission trips he has flown far behind enemy lines to the beleaguered Nuba Mountains in Central Sudan with tonnes of Bibles, books and relief aid. He has then walked throughout the war devastated Nuba Mountains showing the Jesus film in Arabic, proclaiming the Gospel, training pastors and evading enemy patrols." (http://www.frontline.org.za/about_director.htm)




.
All that seems to be be saying that he has traveled through countries without ever sharing a respect for the beliefs of the people. The countries that he lists in his article are not those in which he has lived and his remarks concerning them are outrageously wrong. To take one example, he states:

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:
...
Switzerland
...

Switzerland has had one major controversy concerning Muslims in recent years. A right wing political group initiated a referendum to prevent the construction of traditional minarets on mosques. The referendum was successful ending this horrible threat to Swiss culture. At the time of the referendum, Switzerland had a grand total of four minarets in existence and no plans for construction of new ones. In the section of Switzerland with the largest Muslim population, Geneva, the vote opposed the referendum and much of the population seemed embarrassed by the jingoistic stupidity of their fellow countrymen. The votes to prevent construction came primarily from those sections with virtually no Muslim or mosques at all. None of the tings e cites as problems are happening in Switzerland.

By the way, when it comes to things like food, there is no question that the growth of a population leads to changes in availability. That is a good thing.

I live in an overwhelmingly Christian area. However, we do have a growing othodox Jewish community. A few things have happened in response to the growth of that community and have helped that community grow faster. First, our town baker, a good Catholic whose family has run the town bakery for 70 years, changed their recipes and production methods to meet orthodox standards for Kosher food. Primarily that meant eliminating the use of all lards and replacing them with butter. At that time, the Jewish community was not a significant market. However, in response to his action, all the business from the Jewish community frequented his bakery. His Christian business grew as well. It turned out they were happier with butter instead of lard as well. Second, the town council voted to permit the Orthodox community to use telephone poles in the area to demarcate the religious areas within which members of the orthodox community could move freely on the sabbath. Those changes did nothing to threaten our community; they strengthened it. I hope that we would make the same accommodations to support any other community, including Muslims, that might seek to come. Do we make similar accommodations for Christian groups? No. We don't need to . Our laws and our institutions are already organized to support Christian communities. We have laws prohibiting liquor sales, car sales and hunting on Sundays. Schools systems and governmental organizations that follow a Christian calendar. And the list goes on.

JDogger
01-09-2010, 12:07 AM
I grew up in Turkey, Lebanon and West Africa. Attended local and International schools. About a third Muslim. I dare say my knowledge of Muslims outstrips the authors' or Bill Spitzers'. All internet BS to the contrary.

I fear more from our reaction to threat, than from the threat itself.

JD

zeus3925
01-09-2010, 12:36 AM
Bill, I don't know why you would even consider posting such tripe. I have known many Muslims since my college days. My physician is a Muslim. I know some of the local clerics on a first name basis. The Muslims I know are not hell bent to blow up the United states nor are they interested in killing anybody. The fanatical minority is not a true reflection of Islam. If you actually met some Muslims on a less than adversarial basis you would learn that.

They don't proselytize me and I don't do the same to them. We do discuss religion on occasion and the core beliefs are not dissimilar from Christianity and Judaism. They accept both the New and Old Testament as well as the Koran as scripture.

Less anyone think they have a chance of converting me to Islam, I own three dogs. Any religion that holds that dogs are unclean and taboo like a pig, is not going to be my cup of tea. I am also too irreverent to pray 5 times a day. I like a nice pork chop every once in a while. Being a German-American, I like a good beer to go with it, something else Islam forbids.

Pete
01-09-2010, 12:49 AM
would both rank far below attorneys. And the least Christian among them are those who profess their beliefs the loudest.
__________________


I do believe your right about that one:D

pete

Pete
01-09-2010, 01:00 AM
Personally and I have nothing against a muslim who goal is only to raise his family and be a good US citizen,

but I have tried to speak to a lot of them,,,I find them rude, unwilling to crack a smile and snooty for the most part, they are not neighborly and for the most part keep themselves,,,
It could be their culture,,, if so I think their culture sucks
I find those who behave this way hard to trust.

pete

Purpledawg
01-09-2010, 03:08 AM
At work we assist all kinds of people and nationalities, religions, and I don't find you can lump all into a stereotype. Many of my clients are middle eastern, asian, spanish, caucasin, indian, russian, and each group has pleasant and not so representatives.

yet last week we did have a family from persian and they must of been from Sadams royal guard, extremely demanding and used heavy intimidation methods. I could tell they were FOB, or deported royality cause they were that far over the top RUDE.

zeus3925
01-09-2010, 07:24 AM
Personally and I have nothing against a muslim who goal is only to raise his family and be a good US citizen,

but I have tried to speak to a lot of them,,,I find them rude, unwilling to crack a smile and snooty for the most part, they are not neighborly and for the most part keep themselves,,,
It could be their culture,,, if so I think their culture sucks
I find those who behave this way hard to trust.

pete

What you are seeing, Pete, are some cultural things going on here. Some individual traits as well. If you were transported to someplace like, say, Dubai, how would you deal with life in a strange land? I know I would seek out as many Americans to stick around with. I would keep contacts from the locals to a minimal mainly because of my lack of competence in their culture. In fact, this is a common reaction of Americans overseas. Remember the book or movie The Ugly American? I guess you may be seeing the Ugly Arabian.

Pete
01-09-2010, 08:36 AM
[QUOTE]What you are seeing, Pete, are some cultural things going on here. Some individual traits as well. If you were transported to someplace like, say, Dubai, how would you deal with life in a strange land? I know I would seek out as many Americans to stick around with. I would keep contacts from the locals to a minimal mainly because of my lack of competence in their culture. In fact, this is a common reaction of Americans overseas. Remember the book or movie The Ugly American? I guess you may be seeing the Ugly Arabian[/QUOTE

well ,,since they al spoke English,, and most of my attempted tries were gas attendents and neibors of my moms and they were not working they were just lounging,,so they had way to much time,,,,,,, I tried to be friendlly and ask them about themselves or their country,,,
And I found almost all of them quite distasteful. I'm guessing if they hate us infedels so much and we turn them in to scum if they talk to us,,,,, why the hell are they here.

Why do people who hate our culture and the people want to move here.
My grandfolks came here and demanded their kids to be american,,, no russian was to be spoke,,,, become an american ,,thats why they came to america.

I just dont understand the mentality,,,and think something is fishy and yes probably its because they dont think like me for no reason. Or like anyone else that is non muslim.

Personally the middle east is better suited for them.

Does this mean I am a racist now:D

Pete

Steve Amrein
01-09-2010, 09:38 AM
Personally and I have nothing against a muslim who goal is only to raise his family and be a good US citizen,

but I have tried to speak to a lot of them,,,I find them rude, unwilling to crack a smile and snooty for the most part, they are not neighborly and for the most part keep themselves,,,
It could be their culture,,, if so I think their culture sucks
I find those who behave this way hard to trust.

pete

I have some Bosnian Muslims that work for me. The are hard working, honest some of the nicest humans I care to meet. I have been to their homes and only been treated highly. They would give anyone they know the shirts off their back or the last buck. All have been in the war at home and some were even POW's and have the serial # tats to show. They show no hate for the Christian religion at all. The also practice religion as we do, sin all week and pray for forgivness later. I even talked with a local muslim religous leader and we talked about religon and the diferences and came to the simple statement that we (most religons) all have Heavon and hell and all believe in God. What we call him, how he came to be are different. The are also not happy to share the same branded religion that is twisted and distorted to fit a agenda. I think many bad things have been done thru out history in the name of religion wrongly to fit some sick agenda.

road kill
01-09-2010, 09:47 AM
I must admit that I do not know what is in the hearts & minds of most Muslims.
(I don't even know what's in the hearts & minds of most Americans anymore!)
I don't care.

I only care about what's in the hearts & minds of some Muslims.

rk

Keith Farmer
01-09-2010, 09:54 AM
"The ridiculous level of violence that Islam serves up to the world makes it impossible to compile a complete list."

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/TheList.htm

Just a cursory glance at what the "religion of peace" is doing world wide shatters all the tripe liberals wish to shove down logical throats.

Here is a small sample and an incomplete list of what muslims are doing world wide in the name of loving peace (and this list is just within the last two months):

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks

Here is a site of interest...I did not watch the videos...I for one cannot fathom how a so-called human being could do such to fellow humans (ahh, but muslims see non-muslims as dogs or pigs so I suppose it is ok).

http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/


.

Keith Farmer
01-09-2010, 09:58 AM
http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_1322.html

This should really help out with anti-terrorism efforts...

Qualifying Occupations
The law and regulations require that every diversity visa entrant must have at least a high school education or its equivalent or have, within the past five years, two years of work experience in an occupation requiring at least two years' training or experience. To learn more about qualifying occupations, see the Diversity Visa Instructions Frequently Asked Question #13 (http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/DV-2011instructions.pdf) and the List of Occupations (http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_1319.html) webpage.

Now that is tough standardization!


.

Pals
01-09-2010, 10:03 AM
My experience has been terrible-pakistani muslim. There may be a vast difference-depending on which country they are originally from, what type of cleric they listen too and so on. But I can tell you that even the 2nd generation born in america muslims that I have personally delt with have a horrible view of women and are a bunch of hypocrits. I'm trying very hard not to generalize, but the last year dealing with this nutcase stalking my daughter and his extended family has left a bad tatse in my mouth. Let alone the fact that they considered my dogs to be unclean-whatever.

Keith Farmer
01-09-2010, 10:18 AM
Jonathan Edwards, the first President of Princeton University, wrote in his "A History of the Work of Redemption." "The two great works of the devil which he … wrought against the Kingdom of Christ are … his Anti-Christian (Romish or Papal) and Mahometan (Muslim or Islamic) kingdoms … which have been, and still are, two kingdoms of great extent and strength. Both together swallow … up the Ancient Roman Empire; the (Papal) kingdom of Antichrist swallowing up the Western Empire, and Satan’s Mahometan kingdom the Eastern Empire … In the Book of Revelation (chapters 16 – 20) … it is in the destruction of these that the glorious victory of Christ at the introduction of the glorious times of the Church, will mainly consist…"


Here is the entire article:


The Challenge of Islam According to the Reformers

In expounding Daniel 9, Martin Luther noted that among others, the prophet Daniel was talking about the Muslim Turks, who at that time were invading Europe: "In the latter part of their reign, when rebels have become completely wicked, a stern-faced king, a master of intrigue will arise. He will become very strong, but not by his own power. He will cause astounding devastation … He will cause deceit to prosper and he will consider himself superior. When they feel secure, he will destroy many and take his stand against the Prince of princes. Yet he will be destroyed, but not by human power." Daniel 9: 23 – 25

Luther wrote that the "two regimes, that of the Pope and that of the Turk, are … antichrist."

John Calvin in a sermon on Deuteronomy 18:15 maintained that Muhammad was one of "the two horns of antichrist."

In his commentaries on Daniel (7: 7 – 18), Calvin put forward the theory that the Muslim Turks were the little horn that sprang up from the beast. As the Turks had conquered much of the old Roman Empire, much of the prophecies concerning Rome could apply to the Muslim world. Islam was one of the two legs of the later Roman Empire described in Daniel 2.

Commenting on Daniel 11:37, Calvin wrote that Muhammad "allowed to men the brutal liberty of chastising their wives and thus he corrupted that conjugal love and fidelity which binds the husband to the wife … Mohamet allowed full scope to various lusts – by permitting a man to have a number of wives … Mohamet invented a new form of religion." (Commentaries on the Book of the Prophet Daniel – John Calvin).
Luther noted that Christ warned about false prophets coming from the desert (Matthew 24: 24 – 26) and this certainly included Muhammad.

Commenting on 2 Thessalonians 2: 3 – 12, Calvin wrote that … "the sect of Mohammad was like a raging overflow, which in its violence tore away about half of the church."

In his commentary on 1 John 2: 18 – 23, Calvin states that the Turks "have a mere idol in place of God."

Luther observed from 1 John 2: 18 – 22 and 4: 1 – 3, "Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist – he denies the Father and the Son." 1 John 2: 22, that the Mohammadans deny both the Fatherhood of God and the Deity of Christ – hence they are liars. They testify against the truth of God’s Word.

On 1 John 4: 3 – 6: "but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus, is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist … this is how we recognise the spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood", Calvin noted that "Mohammad too asserts that he has drawn his dreams only from Heaven … False spirits claim the Name of God."
Luther observed that the Muslim Turks want "to eradicate the Christians."

The 1637 Calvinist Dordt Bible in Dutch, comments on Revelation 16:12 that the Muslim nations of the East would still unite with one another in a Pan-Islamic Jihad against the West.

The 1643 Westminster Assembly’s "Larger Catechism" calls on Christians to ... "pray, that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, that the Gospel propagated throughout the world …" It’s "Directory for the Public Worship of God" instructs congregations to "pray for the propagation of the Gospel and Kingdom of Christ to all nations, for the conversion of the Jews, the fullness of the gentiles, the fall of antichrist, and the deliverance of the distressed Churches abroad from the tyranny of the antiChristian faction, and from the cruel oppression and blasphemies of the Turk."

Commenting on Rev. 9: 1 – 11, the Dutch Dordt Bible of 1637 suggests that Muhammad is "Apollyon" (which is Greek for the Hebrew word "Abaddon" which means destroyer) and the army of locusts and scorpions are the Arab and Saracen armies which wage Jihad in Muhammad’s name.

In his Institutes (Book 2, chapter 6:4), Calvin writes: "So today the Turks, although they proclaim at the top of their lungs that the Creator of Heaven and earth is God, still, while repudiating Christ, substitute an idol in the place of the true God."

Jonathan Edwards, the first President of Princeton University, wrote in his "A History of the Work of Redemption." "The two great works of the devil which he … wrought against the Kingdom of Christ are … his Anti-Christian (Romish or Papal) and Mahometan (Muslim or Islamic) kingdoms … which have been, and still are, two kingdoms of great extent and strength. Both together swallow … up the Ancient Roman Empire; the (Papal) kingdom of Antichrist swallowing up the Western Empire, and Satan’s Mahometan kingdom the Eastern Empire … In the Book of Revelation (chapters 16 – 20) … it is in the destruction of these that the glorious victory of Christ at the introduction of the glorious times of the Church, will mainly consist…"

In a sermon on 2 Timothy 1:3, Calvin explained: "The Turks at this day, can allege and say for themselves: ‘We serve God from our ancestors!’ … It is a good while ago since Mahomet gave them the cup of his devilish dreams to drink, and they got drunk with them. It is about a thousand years since those cursed hellhounds were made drunk with their follies … Let us be wise and discreet! … For otherwise, we shall be like the Turks and Heathen!" (Sermons on Timothy and Titus – John Calvin).

Calvin pointed out that the reign of antichrist will be destroyed by the Word of God (2 Thessalonians 2:8). "Paul does not think that Christ will accomplish this in a single moment … Christ will scatter the darkness in which antichrist will reign, by the rays which He will emit before His coming – just as the sun, before becoming visible to us, chases away the darkness of the night with its bright light.


"This victory of the Word will therefore be seen in the World. For ‘the Breath (or Spirit) of His Mouth’ means simply His Word … as in Isaiah 11:4, the passage to which Paul appears to be alluding … It is a notable commendation of true and sound doctrine that it is represented as being sufficient to put an end to all ungodliness, and as destined at all times to be victorious over all devices of Satan. It is also a commendation when … a little further on … the preaching of this doctrine, is referred to as Christ’s ‘coming’ to us." (Commentary on Second Thessalonians - John Calvin).
"The Kingdoms of the world have become the Kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign for ever and ever." Revelation 11:15
"All nations will come and worship before You …" Revelation 15:4
"The desert tribes will bow before Him and His enemies will lick the dust ... All kings will bow down to Him and all nations will serve Him." Psalm 72: 9-11Dr. Peter Hammond



.

Keith Farmer
01-09-2010, 10:29 AM
Here is a forum...you guys like forums...where former Muslims discuss why they left the "peaceful religion". Why don't you liberals join up and tell those folks how wrong they have it?

http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=30


Here is just one sample of what former Muslims say about their formerly peaceful-religion:




On the surface it is disguised as a peaceful, beautiful, miraculous religion.... with it's mesmerizing verses, calligraphy, breathtaking mosques. But this is all just a front. As I began to scratch the surface of this front, the truth began to rear it's ugly head. Bloodshed, genocide, child-brides, slaves, wars, conversions.... are all the legacy of Islam. I felt sick to my stomach that I had ever followed such a religion.

I think the last straw was when I read about right hand possessions (slave girls who were the wives/sisters/daughters of the men Muslims had killed in battle), and how the Muslim men slept with these women sometimes on the same night that their brothers and husbands had been killed. I was then fully convinced that the Qur'an could never be the word of God.

A religion which had caused so much death, war, rape and bloodshed at it's very conception.... could never be the one true religion it claims to be.

Muslims today claim that terrorism is ruining Islam, but they are too blind and brainwashed to see that Islam was ruined from day one.

Today, I feel proud to be called an apostate and a kaffir. It is a compliment to me that I have no association with that religion!





.

Pete
01-09-2010, 10:29 AM
don't turn my back on people that need my help, but I don't turn my back on people that have sworn to kill me and mine either.
My experience's with muslims are very similar to yours Pete.
Walt

Thanks Walt
for a while I thought I was seeing things,,,I'm glad someone else recognises it and has the kahonies to say so.
Behaviors supercede color and creed,,,

I only have trouble with people or groups of people when there motives are to force their will on my will,,,,
I have no problems with a liberal person until they rally,pass laws that impede my way of life,,,, consevatives dont pass laws that screw with my way of life,,,didnt used to anyway,,,but libs,and some of their alies (muslims) have a different motivation I think.
Before I sign off,,,yes I believe there are good upstanding muslims

but in general I think they would like to make me and you muslim,,,,but its something I seldom think a bout,,,, till I come to potus so maby I'm not a racist :D
Pete

Pete
01-09-2010, 10:47 AM
One more thing I'd like to add
I think the muslim goat herders show way more savy then our worlds greatest think tank,,,
If we dont lower ourselves and become as savy and as savage as them then we get what we deserve.


records in the old testiment explain why this problems need to be eradicated and how you eradicate it. And yes its talking about the same genetic line with spiritual implications.


We have become so smart in the last 30 years,,,out of roughly 6000 We cant stop a goat herder without colapsing our economy

Pete

Terri
01-09-2010, 10:36 PM
You guys are really scaring me! I'm not a fan of any Islamic government and I find some things Muslims do odd. I think most of the people who claim to be Muslim know very little about the Koran or the religion. Most of the people from the Middle East, Asia, and Africa described on this thread are products of their culture and not the religion.

Terri

Pete
01-10-2010, 09:27 AM
You guys are really scaring me! I'm not a fan of any Islamic government and I find some things Muslims do odd. I think most of the people who claim to be Muslim know very little about the Koran or the religion. Most of the people from the Middle East, Asia, and Africa described on this thread are products of their culture and not the religion

I dont know what percentage of islamm thinks the US is abunch of infidels,, or an unclean object. I'll bet its more than 20 percent.

So because i'm a logical guy,,I ask myself ,,well maby the ones moving here are different,,, so you speak to them ,,and they prove to you they must think your unclean or infidels or whatever,,, I know they talk to their neihbors where they come from,,,,I see them ban together with their own kind,,,why not a smile,,a hello, why wont they wave back from ten feet away when they are looking right at you. If you have lived here for years you must of realized that just means people are being friendly.
So you tell me what it is..,, why the hell move here if you dislike the people and their way of life,,, what are they giving up to live amoungst the infidels,,

This aint normal human behavior unless in their minds we are unclean,,,and so why live amounst us.
I think its an honest question. and NO Terri Fear is a freadful thing and we are much happier when we have learned how to get rid of it in our lives

When my father and my inlaws were fighting world war 2,, They spoke very lowley of the krauts and nips. When you fighting for your life you dont glorify your enemy or sympathise with them. You put a bullet in their head and walk away.
You grieve about what happened when all is said and done. Then as time goes on you dont think lowley of your past enemey because you have let by gones be by gones and you come to realize many who you had to kill were good people too.

My fatherin law bombed cities in germany I dont think he at the time was concerned with killing civilians only that his mission was successful,and his country was better for it,, This eneemy thinks the same


I would have no problem with profiling them and putting them under a light.
We did it to the japaneese,and most of them loved america,I can tell you straight up most comming here now DO NOT.

Pete, I dont think like most,,which is fine

zeus3925
01-10-2010, 10:03 AM
Now I know how lynch mobs get psyched up. Look at yourselves before you do something stupid.

Pete
01-10-2010, 10:15 AM
Keith

all religions christian and islamic and orientals stuff have myths and fables in them.

And they all have one in common which traces back to egyptian thinking.

Even who and what JC is , has become littered with fables,,,

Thats why there is over 4000 denominations or belief systems and only 1 true God.
I ask myself does God have multiple personalities,,,hell no. He is the creator of all things logical its how the earth remains in orbit,, without order and the logic of math it couldnt be so.

while I dont think anyone is 100 percent correct on their beliefs I do believe some are more accurate than others

And much of it is easily proven,,

I see alot of biblical facts that dont cross reference well with Calvins theory

we should be more concerned with what JC or what with his Father thinks than a guy named Calvin as nice as he may be.

It would be more easily for me to absorb if you showed how he concluded this info with a trail of logical facts summerizing each statement. Sometime things are hard to swallow without seeing it on paper

God made spiritual Laws and natural laws and they do not contradict.
They flow and exist together and must be logical,, Gods " word" is the greek word logos where we get the word logic
God almighty is 100 percent logical but people have denyed him of this and have made him look like a story book fable in their teachings

respectfully
Pete

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 02:01 PM
It would be more easily for me to absorb if you showed how he concluded this info with a trail of logical facts summerizing each statement.


Read the bible...then Read The Institutes; it really is that simple Pete.




.

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 02:08 PM
Even who and what JC is , has become littered with fables,,,




Like your notion that Jesus is not God...or God with us...or God in the flesh?

If by "who and what JC (as you so irreverently refer to our Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ) is, has become..." you mean how He has been reduced to "just another prophet" by Muslims, Mormons, and most every other religion in the world then I agree.

If you mean that He has become known as God (which He has been from eternity before the foundation of the world) then you are dead and dangerously wrong!

But, again, we have discussed this in the past and I stand by my position that your ideology concerning Jesus as not being God has already been refuted as heresy...what more can I add?...


.

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 02:10 PM
I see alot of biblical facts that dont cross reference well with Calvins theory


Give me some of the "alot" of biblical facts that don't mesh...I am very curious indeed!



.

YardleyLabs
01-10-2010, 02:44 PM
Like your notion that Jesus is not God...or God with us...or God in the flesh?

If by "who and what JC (as you so irreverently refer to our Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ) is, has become..." you mean how He has been reduced to "just another prophet" by Muslims, Mormons, and most every other religion in the world then I agree.

If you mean that He has become known as God (which He has been from eternity before the foundation of the world) then you are dead and dangerously wrong!

But, again, we have discussed this in the past and I stand by my position that your ideology concerning Jesus as not being God has already been refuted as heresy...what more can I add?...


.
The notion of heresy is interesting.

From its origins, the term simply meant a failure to conform with the teachings of the Roman Cathoic Church. By that definition, Calvin and Luther were high on the list of heretics, as are all Protestants.

A looser definition would be a belief contrary to what is commonly accepted as truth. Of course, if using that definition, you would need to specify the group you are referring to when defining common acceptance. Christianity may be the most widely declared religion in the world, but only about a third of the population defines themselves as Christian and a much smaller number would identify with your notion of what constitutes Christianity.

That would imply that the only true heretics are those who believe that there is only on true and correct form of religious belief. That, of course, makes you one of the more obvious heretics around. Alternatively, you could accept that "heresy" in today's world is defined solely as a deviation from the beliefs of the accuser; that is, it is nothing more than an inflammatory way to say "I disagree with what you are saying." Or we can return to thr original definition and accept that only orthodox Roman Catholics have managed to avoid heresy and those of us who make up the other 90% of the world's population can simply revel in the freedom of our heretical beliefs.

dnf777
01-10-2010, 02:45 PM
you mean how He has been reduced to "just another prophet" by Muslims, Mormons, and most every other religion in the world then I agree.


Keith,
I'm no Biblical scholar, but didn't even the early Christians revere Christ as a prophet only, and only by papal council vote was he elevated to deity status around 300AD?

I'm not arguing, just asking, as you sound well read in this area. Also, I know many, many good people who live more like Christ taught, than many Christians. If they fail to recognize Christ as the Son of God, are they in for a warm afterlife according to our teachings as Christians. (personally, I don't believe so, but again, just askin your take.)

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 03:06 PM
with your notion of what constitutes Christianity.


It is not my notion.


.

dnf777
01-10-2010, 03:36 PM
The notion of heresy is interesting.


How accurate would it be to equate heretics with infidels? Or more precisely, equate the words' usages?

Franco
01-10-2010, 03:56 PM
It is not my notion.


.

Sure it is, you are always defending it!

You have the freedom to believe in what you do but the, "religious sect superiority complex" is scary.

dnf777
01-10-2010, 04:00 PM
{No evolution, no monkey ancestors, no big bang!}

Don't you think God is capable of these things?
Maybe its just the explanation of what really happened wouldn't fit in one book, so he decided to give us the "Dummies" version?? ;-)

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 04:03 PM
I'm no Biblical scholar, but didn't even the early Christians revere Christ as a prophet only



Amongst believers the truth that God would one day dwell among His people and redeem them back to Himself was fully anticipated. In fact, there are well over 300 prophecies in the Old Testament concerning Messiah which Jesus fulfilled.

For an example...Jesus Himself stated while He was on this earth:

John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”

Abraham "saw it and was glad" via faith as is noted here:

Romans 4:3 "...Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness."



The bible is a complete picture of Jesus from Genesis to Revelation. However, the spirit of anti-christ is at work to deny Jesus' deity as is noted here:


1 John 4:2 By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God,



Peter emphasized the danger of such heretical teaching thet denies the deity of Jesus:


2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.


Here is just a small sample of the verses that support Christ's deity:

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.(emphasis mine)



Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn (firstborn here means the preeminent one) over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.

Here is the Profession of Faith from Nicea:

THE PROFESSION OF FAITH OF THE 318 FATHERS


We believe in one God the Father all powerful, maker of all things both seen and unseen. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten begotten from the Father, that is from the substance [Gr. ousias, Lat. substantia] of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten [Gr. gennethenta, Lat. natum] not made [Gr. poethenta, Lat. factum], CONSUBSTANTIAL [Gr. homoousion, Lat. unius substantiae (quod Graeci dicunt homousion)] with the Father, through whom all things came to be, both those in heaven and those in earth; for us humans and for our salvation he came down and became incarnate, became human, suffered and rose up on the third day, went up into the heavens, is coming to judge the living and the dead. And in the holy Spirit.
And those who say
"there once was when he was not", and "before he was begotten he was not", and that
he came to be from
things that were not, or
from another hypostasis [Gr. hypostaseos] or substance [Gr. ousias, Lat. substantia],affirming that the Son of God is subject to change or alteration these the catholic and apostolic church anathematises.

Calvin writes in his Institutes in Chapter 13 the following (I suggest anyone interested in this subject read the entire institues but specifically this chapter):

2. The three "Persons" in God
But there is another special mark by which he designates himself, for the purpose of giving a more intimate knowledge of his nature. While he proclaims his unity, he distinctly sets it before us as existing in three persons. These we must hold, unless the bare and empty name of Deity merely is to flutter in our brain without any genuine knowledge. Moreover, lest any one should dream of a threefold God, or think that the simple essence is divided by the three Persons, we must here seek a brief and easy definition which may effectually guard us from error.
But as some strongly inveigh against the term Person as being merely of human inventions let us first consider how far they have any ground for doing so. When the Apostle calls the Son of God "the express image of his person," (Heb. 1: 3,) he undoubtedly does assign to the Father some subsistence in which he differs from the Son. For to hold with some interpreters that the term is equivalent to essence, (as if Christ represented the substance of the Father like the impression of a seal upon wax,) were not only harsh but absurd. For the essence of God being simple and undivided, and contained in himself entire, in full perfection, without partition or diminution, it is improper,nay, ridiculous, to call it his express image, (charaktes.) Butbecause the Father, though distinguished by his own peculiarproperties, has expressed himself wholly in the Son, he is said with perfect reason to have rendered his person (hypostasis) manifest in him. And this aptly accords with what is immediately added, viz.,that he is "the brightness of his glory." The fair inference from the Apostle's words is, that there is a proper subsistence(hypostasis) of the Father, which shines refulgent in the Son. From this, again it is easy to infer that there is a subsistence(hypostasis) of the Son which distinguishes him from the Father.
The same holds in the case of the Holy Spirit; for we will immediately prove both that he is God, and that he has a separate subsistence from the Father. This, moreover, is not a distinction of essence, which it were impious to multiply. If credit, then, is given to the Apostle's testimony, it follows that there are three persons(hypostases) in God. The Latins having used the word Persona to express the same thing as the Greek "hupostatis", it betrays excessive fastidiousness and even perverseness to quarrel with the term. The most literal translation would be subsistence. Many have used substance in the same sense. Nor, indeed, was the use of the term Person confined to the Latin Church. For the Greek Church in like manner, perhaps, for the purpose of testifying their consent, have taught that there are three "prosopa" (aspects) in God. All these, however, whether Greeks or Latins, though differing as to the word, are perfectly agreed in substance.


.

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 04:06 PM
Sure it is, you are always defending it!



Your arguing prowess is pathetic:cool:

I am only espousing what the bible declares from Genesis to Revelation...look at my quotes...they are scriptural not opinion based.



.

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 04:18 PM
Don't you think God is capable of these things?



Capable????

According to His Word we have a complete historical and geneological record that screams otherwise...that is what I embrace because He has embraced me through His grace and I hold fast to His Word.

Why would I want to try and implant something manmade?...that would be ludicrous.


.

dnf777
01-10-2010, 04:18 PM
Your arguing prowess is pathetic:cool:

I am only espousing what the bible declares from Genesis to Revelation...look at my quotes...they are scriptural not opinion based.

.

But it is your opinion that the scriptures are accurate and true. Not all believe that. Many have their own scriptures that tell a different story. That was one problem I had with my Christian upbringing...is the exclusive path to God and answers that it preached. It did not allow for other religions or even scientific discovery. Sure, I was taught to respect other religious views..."no matter how wrong they may be"....God will forgive them maybe. Once I got out in the world a little bit, and saw good people of all colors and beliefs, I began to doubt the exclusivity of any one religion, and that was considered heretic?

dnf777
01-10-2010, 04:26 PM
Capable????

According to His Word we have a complete historical and geneological record that screams otherwise...that is what I embrace because He has embraced me through His grace and i hold fast to His Word.

Why would I want to try and implant something manmade?...that would be ludicrous.


.


We've heard that same reply throughout the ages.
There is really no way to respond, except to pray the church isn't in a position to imprison or execute those who search for truth and reason outside of a pew.
Thankfully, the Church has relented on some minor details along the way.

Franco
01-10-2010, 04:33 PM
Your arguing prowess is pathetic:cool:

I am only espousing what the bible declares from Genesis to Revelation...look at my quotes...they are scriptural not opinion based.



.

Nope, they are opinion! Just some mere moral writing his thoughs, using his ancient and limited knowledge to draw from.

Should we refer to you as Allatoyah Farmer?

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 04:39 PM
That was one problem I had with my Christian upbringing...is the exclusive path to God and answers that it preached


That is the problem the world has with Christianity...that is why the persecution of Christians has always existed and always will.

Peter preached this in Jerusalem:

8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders of Israel: 9 If we this day are judged for a good deed done to a helpless man, by what means he has been made well, 10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. 11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+4&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-27030a)] 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

The fact that Christianity is polarizing and exclusive is not a problem to me. The bible is explicit in its declarations of Jesus' exclusive rights as the sole provider of salvation. The Gospel is scandalous in its nature. The bible declares that it, the Gospel, is foolishness to the Greeks (gentiles) and a stumbling block to the Jews.

This I know...the Gospel will do one of two things when it is presented as is evidenced even here on this forum:

1) It will absolutely divide and anger folks to the point of persecution

2) It will save the lost sinner to the uttermost

My role in the scheme of things is to proclaim the Gospel...the results are not in my hands.



.

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 04:41 PM
Should we refer to you as Allatoyah Farmer?


If you like...:rolleyes:



Just some mere moral writing his thoughs


Huh?


.

Sundown49 aka Otey B
01-10-2010, 04:43 PM
Having worked in Saudi, Iran, Kuwait and the UAE and Bahran i have just one thing to say. Those of you who like them so much should go over there and experience for yourself how any one other than Arabs are viewed. A camel has more rights than a woman in their culture. Having a woman as secretary of state going over there is like sending a chicken in a fox den . Smile to her face and laugh at the United States for being so stupid for sending a woman to do a man's job.

Franco
01-10-2010, 04:56 PM
Huh?


.

A person, writing his thoughts of what he thinks his god meant.

The god concept has been around a long time, maybe 30,000 years. It is within ancient man's reality. That's why we have so many of them!

nrsergent
01-10-2010, 05:18 PM
FULFILLED PROPHECY – Sets the Bible Apart From All Other Religious Writings.


• Specific Future Events vs. Vague Generalities

• Judgment of Tyre – Ezekiel 26

• Succession of World Empires – Daniel 2, 7

• Fulfillment of Jesus as Messiah – 300 Predictions
(probability of 8 predictions = 1 out of 1017)*

*Stoner says that by using the modern science of probability in reference to eight prophecies, “we find that the chance that any man might have lived down to the present time and fulfilled all eight prophecies is 1 in 10 to the 17th.” That would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. In order to help us comprehend this staggering probability, Stoner illustrates it by supposing that ‘we take 10 to the 17th silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They will cover all of the state two feet deep. Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would have had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man.
Peter Stoner, Science Speaks

TRANSMISSION – The Bible’s Purity and Perseverance throughout the Centuries is Nothing Short of Miraculous.


• Meticulousness of Copyists in Transcriptions

• Proximity of Manuscripts

• Over 24,000 New Testament Manuscripts

• Dead Sea Scrolls

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 05:48 PM
...maybe 30,000 years.


And you say that "ancient man" was poorly educated.

Only of late could such ignorance be espoused in the name of science.

Some of the men you mention as being "ancient" were educated well beyond what our educational system could even fathom producing these days; just look at what you believe, as has been taught you via public education, as an example:

You have demonstrated that you believe mankind originated from nothing (how totally absurd is the notion that nothing...a non-thing... could ever produce SOMETHING...anything), then advanced to molecules, then advanced through millions of years to monkeys, then a few million more to intermediate species, then a few million more to humans.

Couple that with your belief that the cosmos are BILLIONS of years old and the absurdity grows even grander!

You base your religion (which evolution is a religion...one that has you hook line and sinker) on the twisted views of a racist madman (Darwin) whose scientific prowess was about as genuine as your arguing prowess.

It seems to me that education, as evidenced by the shear ignorance of what you say is logical and rational, is now in the back seat (waaaay back in fact) to those you deem as ancient...




.

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 05:51 PM
I have customers here in CT and NY that say the exact same thing.


I have a son-in-law (who is the father of my two grand-children) who has been over in Iraq for the Airforce over the past several months...I don't need any other evidence...



.

Keith Farmer
01-10-2010, 05:59 PM
FULFILLED PROPHECY – Sets the Bible Apart From All Other Religious Writings.



This is what God has said concerning every other so-called god (idol) that mankind has established.

The Futility of Idols

Isaiah41: 21 “ Present your case,” says the LORD.

“ Bring forth your strong reasons,” says the King of Jacob.
22 “ Let them bring forth and show us what will happen;
Let them show the former things, what they were,
That we may consider them,
And know the latter end of them;
Or declare to us things to come.
23 Show the things that are to come hereafter,
That we may know that you are gods;
Yes, do good or do evil,
That we may be dismayed and see it together.
24 Indeed you are nothing,
And your work is nothing;
He who chooses you is an abomination.
25 “ I have raised up one from the north,
And he shall come;
From the rising of the sun he shall call on My name;
And he shall come against princes as though mortar,
As the potter treads clay.
26 Who has declared from the beginning, that we may know?
And former times, that we may say, ‘He is righteous’?
Surely there is no one who shows,
Surely there is no one who declares,
Surely there is no one who hears your words.
27 The first time I said to Zion,

‘ Look, there they are!’
And I will give to Jerusalem one who brings good tidings.
28 For I looked, and there was no man;
I looked among them, but there was no counselor,
Who, when I asked of them, could answer a word.
29 Indeed they are all worthless;[a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2041&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-18478a)]
Their works are nothing;
Their molded images are wind and confusion.

dnf777
01-10-2010, 06:03 PM
[COLOR=black]The fact that Christianity is polarizing and exclusive is not a problem to me. The bible is explicit in its declarations of Jesus' exclusive rights as the sole provider of salvation.
.

I'm not sure I understand your point. What are you saying has happened to all the good people of the world who happen to not be Christian? What about Chief Joseph? Anne Franke? These people have no path to salvation because they don't believe your Gospel?

"My role in the scheme of things is to proclaim the Gospel...the results are not in my hands."

WHaaaa??

YardleyLabs
01-10-2010, 06:19 PM
Like many things, prophecy fulfillment is in the eyes of the beholder. Judaism has long foretold the coming of the messiah. Christians view Jesus as the fulfillment of that prophecy. Most Jews rejected that assertion at the time of Jesus and continue to reject that notion today.

With respect to Nicea, Keith posts writings from the 318 Bishops. What he fails to note is that many more were there. The pagan Constantine had already committed to support the Roman sects and used a Legion of Rome's finest to arrest the leaders of the Unitarians and remove their followers to help achieve consensus among those that remained (Sort of like the Democrats locking the Republicans out of the health care debates). Once the truncated "committee" had reached agreement in support of the Trinity, the Unitarians, who rejected the idea that Jesus was divine, were declared heretics and subject to execution for preaching their beliefs. This is a tradition that continued until 1553 when John Calvin and his followers executed Michael Servetus, considered by many as the father of modern Unitarianism, for his rejection of the orthodox notion of the trinity.

By the way. the Council of Nicea did not actually resolve the debate. Constantine actually changed his mind subsequently and recalled Ariius -- leader of the Unitarians -- from exile and attempted to jail Athanasius, leader of the Trinitarians, who fled. Over the next fifty years, there were many conferences supporting unitarians beliefs until the dispute was settled by by the Emperor Theodosius in 381 and declared to be the religious standard of the Empire. While one may choose to believe that this debate was divinely inspired and led, I suspect that good old fashioned politics won the day and, as is always the case, the winners got to write the history books.

In a letter to Benjamin Rush on 6/12/1812, President john Adams quipped:

"The Trinity was carried in a general council by one vote against a quaternity; the Virgin Mary lost an equality with the Father, Son, and Spirit only by a single suffrage."

While I suspect his vote tally was wrong, he does point out the range of beliefs at the time.

Franco
01-10-2010, 06:24 PM
And you say that "ancient man" was poorly educated.

You have demonstrated that you believe mankind originated from nothing (how totally absurd is the notion that nothing...a non-thing... could ever produce SOMETHING...anything), then advanced to molecules, then advanced through millions of years to monkeys, then a few million more to intermediate species, then a few million more to humans.

Couple that with your belief that the cosmos are BILLIONS of years old and the absurdity grows even grander!



.

Ancient man was limited in his grasp of the universe. Creating 'gods' was thier rational conclusion.

I NEVER said we came from nothing. I do belive that the universe is 13.7 billion years old. With that time frame, it means that the universe has always exsisted. The universe was something else prior to its current form.

Mortals will never fully understand the 'why' of thier being. That is the great mystery of life and that is what I accept as truth!

zeus3925
01-10-2010, 06:28 PM
Does it bother you I don't believe in the things the same way that you that you do?

Pals
01-10-2010, 06:41 PM
No-chances are you are friendly, willing to sit a chat, don't think women are second class servants(I hope) AND you love dogs. So Zeus you don't bother me.;)

Pete
01-10-2010, 09:40 PM
Keith,
I'm no Biblical scholar, but didn't even the early Christians revere Christ as a prophet only, and only by papal council vote was he elevated to deity status around 300AD

I'm impressed for a change:D

Various religions have been worshiping God in groups of 3 since the Egyptians,
If God raised himself from the dead then man has not been redeemed
It would take a man who was like adam ,,which was made formed and created as JC was for total redemtion.

God calls him his son,,, JC calls him his father my son is not me and I am not my son.
For God to screw with words so we cant figure out what he means is ludacrist.
We will differ here for ever Keith. There are roughly 6 verses that may indicate that he is God and well over a thousand that say it aint so.

We should not cast those 6 totally out the window but maby they need to be worked alittle

Any way this aint the place for it

Pete
01-10-2010, 09:43 PM
The bible is a complete picture of Jesus from Genesis to Revelation. However, the spirit of anti-christ is at work to deny Jesus' deity as is noted here

The first part I can agree with ,,but again so were we

You know God predestinated us before the foundations of the world

Pete
01-10-2010, 10:11 PM
2 Peter 2:1 But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction.



Keith
I dont deny Christ I deny him as God almighty creator of heavans and earth

Matthew 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Just one of hundred,,, JC says its his father,,,,, again my son is not me

Pete
01-10-2010, 10:14 PM
8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders of Israel: 9 If we this day are judged for a good deed done to a helpless man, by what means he has been made well, 10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. 11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’[[/COLOR]a (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+4&version=NKJV#fen-NKJV-27030a)] 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved]

It should read that by the name of JC of Naz whom ye crucified whom JC raised himself from the dead

Pete
01-10-2010, 10:17 PM
have customers here in CT and NY that say the exact same thing. Though I haven't met anyone with experience in all those countries. Just working in one or two seems to do the trick.
Walt

Ive had customers who lived there for 20 years tell me the same

Pete

Pete
01-10-2010, 10:23 PM
By the way. the Council of Nicea did not actually resolve the debate. Constantine actually changed his mind subsequently and recalled Ariius -- leader of the Unitarians -- from exile and attempted to jail Athanasius, leader of the Trinitarians, who fled. Over the next fifty years, there were many conferences supporting unitarians beliefs until the dispute was settled by by the Emperor Theodosius in 381 and declared to be the religious standard of the Empire. While one may choose to believe that this debate was divinely inspired and led, I suspect that good old fashioned politics won the day and, as is always the case, the winners got to write the history books

I concur
Good to see you using your genious for good:p

Pete

Julie R.
01-10-2010, 10:56 PM
In the mid-1980s when I worked at the State Dept., I was a delegate to the U.N. Law of the Sea conference and there I got to meet many Muslims. In fact I was a member of a small group that included delegates from Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, U.A.E., Oman and several other Muslim countries. Also knew plenty of people who'd been foreign service officers in Muslim countries.

Without exception every Muslim I met treated women like pack camels and brood sows, and non-believers weren't accorded much more respect. Even the diplomats from the supposedly western-friendly nations, the supposed best and brightest and certainly the best educated among them. It wasn't just me being racist; even the pinkos and one-worlders agreed back in the days when you could question differences without being labeled a racist.

When I left State and got into real estate, I worked at a condominium complex that had a large population of Middle Easterners, mainly Saudis because at that time they got a stipend from their govt. of about $40,000 a year to live here while they obtained post graduate degrees. Most were men in their middle 20s, many were married. They spoke some English, but wanted to learn more, so I started teaching a conversational English class in the sales office after hours to some of the men.

They wanted to learn, but they were abysmally rude to me and after 2 mos. I stopped teaching the class as it got dark earlier and I got tired of the sexual harassment and some of the students were kind of scary. Once when I suggested they bring their wives one said they didn't want them to learn any English at all, it might make them too uppity.

And the men were uniformly rude to their wives--the office overlooked the parking lot and whenever you'd see a family come back from a shopping trip, the men would walk to the building empty-handed, dressed in Western clothes, while their robed wives, with their faces covered, carried in all the bags like pack camels.

It is a totally different culture and I do think many of them would like to blow us off the face of the earth just because we are different. To me they are like pit bulls. There are good pit bulls, but if I see one loose I will go out of my way to avoid it and treat it as a potential killer unless introduced by someone I know and trust.

Hoosier
01-10-2010, 11:38 PM
I have a friend who took a job as a bouncer at a bar in Minneapolis. The bar was owned by Somalis and had an almost 100% Somali customer base. According to him he broke up about 100 fights and every time it was a man beating up a woman. Don't know if it was a fluke, but it seems to jive with what is being said here.

david gibson
01-11-2010, 01:06 AM
The bible is a complete picture of Jesus from Genesis to Revelation. However, the spirit of anti-christ is at work to deny Jesus' deity as is noted here:

i'm no biblical scholar either, but when was Jesus a part of Genesis? not starting a debate, just missing the connection....anyway, i digress.


this country of mine was founded on christian principles, and whether i agree with all of them or not is no matter, what matters is it is the country of my ancestors, family, and fellow americans that shed their blood to keep and defend it, and i feel it is imperative to continue with a christian foundation and reject islam in every shape and form. sure, there are "good" muslims, but there are exceptions to every rule. the long and short - christianity in america has done a much better job the past few decades in evaluating the treatment of blacks and native americans, and even women in earlier centuries, and recognizes its past deeds. as bad as christianity can look to outsiders, it pales to islam.

islam continues to suppress women and strap bombs on young people to kill innocents. i dont see radical christians doing any thing of the sort. muslims enforse female circumcision , and are beginning to do it even here, as well as "honor" killings.

i dont see any radical christian sect doing anything close to this atrocious.

to compare islam to christianity in terms of civility is a farce. "religion of peace" my a$$; draw a picture of Mohamed and put it on a tshirt and see how long you live. heck, i half expect death threats just for saying that.

i say we take every suicide bombers body - whats left of it - and bury them with pig parts. every time. that way they cant enter their "heaven" and cash in on the 72 virgins. even though the story has never been fully verified, there are enough consistencies and similar stories to support this approach that was taken by General Pershing:

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pershing.asp

sure would be a cruel thing to do to a pig. ;-)

YardleyLabs
01-11-2010, 08:41 AM
In the mid-1980s when I worked at the State Dept., I was a delegate to the U.N. Law of the Sea conference and there I got to meet many Muslims. In fact I was a member of a small group that included delegates from Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, U.A.E., Oman and several other Muslim countries. Also knew plenty of people who'd been foreign service officers in Muslim countries.

Without exception every Muslim I met treated women like pack camels and brood sows, and non-believers weren't accorded much more respect. Even the diplomats from the supposedly western-friendly nations, the supposed best and brightest and certainly the best educated among them. It wasn't just me being racist; even the pinkos and one-worlders agreed back in the days when you could question differences without being labeled a racist.

When I left State and got into real estate, I worked at a condominium complex that had a large population of Middle Easterners, mainly Saudis because at that time they got a stipend from their govt. of about $40,000 a year to live here while they obtained post graduate degrees. Most were men in their middle 20s, many were married. They spoke some English, but wanted to learn more, so I started teaching a conversational English class in the sales office after hours to some of the men.

They wanted to learn, but they were abysmally rude to me and after 2 mos. I stopped teaching the class as it got dark earlier and I got tired of the sexual harassment and some of the students were kind of scary. Once when I suggested they bring their wives one said they didn't want them to learn any English at all, it might make them too uppity.

And the men were uniformly rude to their wives--the office overlooked the parking lot and whenever you'd see a family come back from a shopping trip, the men would walk to the building empty-handed, dressed in Western clothes, while their robed wives, with their faces covered, carried in all the bags like pack camels.

It is a totally different culture and I do think many of them would like to blow us off the face of the earth just because we are different. To me they are like pit bulls. There are good pit bulls, but if I see one loose I will go out of my way to avoid it and treat it as a potential killer unless introduced by someone I know and trust.
Julie,

When I was a kid and living in Sicily, you could tell the marital status of a woman by her dress. Upon marriage, appropriately enough, the woman dressed in black. During the summer, when entire families would sit out on the street at night because of the heat, the men sat any way they wished but the women sat facing the wall of the building so they would not tempt other men by showing any other part of their legs. If, for whatever reason, a woman was seen nude by another man, or spent an extended time with another man without a chaperone, the presumption was that they had sex. If the women were unmarried, she had to marry the man or be disgraced forever, and possibly killed. The man had to marry her or face death himself. If the woman were married death was the accepted outcome. This whole set of traditions was integrated into the courtship process. If a man and woman wanted to marry, but her father refused, the daughter would ask for her mother's help to have the man spend the night with the woman to force the father to consent to the marriage. This was considered to be an "honor rape" and was a widely sanctioned process.

Not all ignorance can be blamed on religion, and religions cannot necessarily be blamed for ignorance.

road kill
01-11-2010, 08:45 AM
Julie,

When I was a kid and living in Sicily, you could tell the marital status of a woman by her dress. Upon marriage, appropriately enough, the woman dressed in black. During the summer, when entire families would sit out on the street at night because of the heat, the men sat any way they wished but the women sat facing the wall of the building so they would not tempt other men by showing any other part of their legs. If, for whatever reason, a woman was seen nude by another man, or spent an extended time with another man without a chaperone, the presumption was that they had sex. If the women were unmarried, she had to marry the man or be disgraced forever, and possibly killed. The man had to marry her or face death himself. If the woman were married death was the accepted outcome. This whole set of traditions was integrated into the courtship process. If a man and woman wanted to marry, but her father refused, the daughter would ask for her mother's help to have the man spend the night with the woman to force the father to consent to the marriage. This was considered to be an "honor rape" and was a widely sanctioned process.

Not all ignorance can be blamed on religion, and religions cannot necessarily be blamed for ignorance.
I'm guessing the difference here is that one story is written and mandated.
The other is anecdotal.
You can decide which is which.

Nice story though.....

rk

YardleyLabs
01-11-2010, 08:58 AM
I'm guessing the difference here is that one story is written and mandated.
The other is anecdotal.
You can decide which is which.

Nice story though.....

rk
Are you sure you want to go there (These come from http://www.religioustolerance.org/fem_bibl.htm, not me. There are many, many more.)?


"As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active power of the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of a woman comes from defect in the active power...." Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica,Q92, art. 1, Reply Obj. 1
"And a man will choose...any wickedness, but the wickedness of a woman...Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die" Ecclesiasticus, 25:18, 19 & 33.
"And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her." Ecclesiastes 7:26, from the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament)Both at the time of Muhammad and the time of Christ, women were viewed in an inferior role. Christianity and Islam share that tradition and it is only recently that it has begun to change. It seems that whenever religious fundamentalists take over a government, they try to back up into a "simpler" age and one of the things that suffers is freedom for women.

Pete
01-11-2010, 09:11 AM
i'm no biblical scholar either, but when was Jesus a part of Genesis? not starting a debate, just missing the connection....anyway, i digress


He is not mentioned specifically ,,,but he is refered to with many different words as a comming redeemer ,,,some of the stuff he will do and what he will fullful ,, each book of the bible has a representation of him speaking of him in some sort of savior ,,reedemer.,,type of way

But he doesnt come on the scene till the gospels

p

Pete
01-11-2010, 09:22 AM
As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active power of the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of a woman comes from defect in the active power...." Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica,Q92, art. 1, Reply Obj. 1
"And a man will choose...any wickedness, but the wickedness of a woman...Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die" Ecclesiasticus, 25:18, 19 & 33.
"And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her." Ecclesiastes 7:26, from the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament)
Both at the



I guess Jeff if you take things without context or reference then it could read like that at face value,,but if you start to throw in other verses we can all see thats what it cant mean


Proverbs 31:10 Who can find <matsa'> a virtuous <chayil> woman <'ishshah>? for her price <meker> is far <rachowq> above rubies <paniyn>.

Pete

Pete
01-11-2010, 09:29 AM
As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active power of the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of a woman comes from defect in the active power...." Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica,Q92, art. 1, Reply Obj. 1

Jeff
even in our day and time the Male still holds top value as far as producing life force
Look at any pedigree,,weather your breeding ,cattle,dogs,sheep you name it,,, Great sires are allways sought. Hell we still use the guys last name when 2 people marry

There is a deep seated reason for this,,,not just culture,,, but yes it does have to do with seed and how and why people seek certain sires for their animals.
Yes females contribute half of everything,,, but therei s one thing that only the male contributes

Pete

david gibson
01-11-2010, 09:36 AM
Julie,

When I was a kid and living in Sicily, you could tell the marital status of a woman by her dress. Upon marriage, appropriately enough, the woman dressed in black. During the summer, when entire families would sit out on the street at night because of the heat, the men sat any way they wished but the women sat facing the wall of the building so they would not tempt other men by showing any other part of their legs. If, for whatever reason, a woman was seen nude by another man, or spent an extended time with another man without a chaperone, the presumption was that they had sex. If the women were unmarried, she had to marry the man or be disgraced forever, and possibly killed. The man had to marry her or face death himself. If the woman were married death was the accepted outcome. This whole set of traditions was integrated into the courtship process. If a man and woman wanted to marry, but her father refused, the daughter would ask for her mother's help to have the man spend the night with the woman to force the father to consent to the marriage. This was considered to be an "honor rape" and was a widely sanctioned process.

Not all ignorance can be blamed on religion, and religions cannot necessarily be blamed for ignorance.


i often see foreign couples here out for a walk, with the man a full 3-5 strides ahead of the woman. she is clearly not allowed to walk at his side, she must follow and be subservient.

give them an inch regards......

zeus3925
01-11-2010, 11:25 AM
I have no concern about Islam in general. However, it does have its divisions, sects and off the mainstream beliefs just as Christianity and Judaism have.

The Wahhabi sect is of particular concern. This sect professes an ultra-conservative view of Islam. It holds full sway in Saudi Arabia because of its collusion with the Saud family's attempt to establish dominance over the Arabian peninsula.

Osama bin Laden and followers draw their philosophy and theology from Wahhabism. Islam does not consider Jews or Christians as non believers, but the Wahhabis consider even fellow Muslims who do not share their religious views as "infidels", who are subject to violence in response. They are out to make the world population true believers in their version of pure Islam.

K.Bullock
01-11-2010, 12:09 PM
Are you sure you want to go there (These come from http://www.religioustolerance.org/fem_bibl.htm, not me. There are many, many more.)?


"As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active power of the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the production of a woman comes from defect in the active power...." Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica,Q92, art. 1, Reply Obj. 1
"And a man will choose...any wickedness, but the wickedness of a woman...Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die" Ecclesiasticus, 25:18, 19 & 33.
"And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her." Ecclesiastes 7:26, from the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament)Both at the time of Muhammad and the time of Christ, women were viewed in an inferior role. Christianity and Islam share that tradition and it is only recently that it has begun to change. It seems that whenever religious fundamentalists take over a government, they try to back up into a "simpler" age and one of the things that suffers is freedom for women.


Seriously? Christianity views women as inferior? Stop it dude. Your way too smart to say that. I could easily post snippets and parse your comments until it seemed like you were a committed Christian and a republican to an uninformed person, context matters. LOL!

Some real examples of women in the bible. Ruth, Sarah, Eve, ....MARY! LOL!
Jesus interaction with women according to recorded history, not the history channels tabloid version. Just one of many of Jesus interactions with women, the woman at the well at midday divorced five times, disgraced in her current cultural context, addressed by Jesus with great love and respect. Jesus radically went against the cultural norm of viewing women as inferior,historical Christianity places much value on all humans.

Islam even gives women some respect in areas where fundamentalism hasn't taken over.

I am no fan of Islam even in it's luke warm state but in that state at least it is not something to be feared. What you are seeing causing trouble even in Islamic countries is a fundamentalist form of Islam(as Zeus already pointed out) that is displacing more moderate Islamic beliefs.

Happy New Year! BTW.

Julie R.
01-11-2010, 12:23 PM
Julie,

When I was a kid and living in Sicily, you could tell the marital status of a woman by her dress. Upon marriage, appropriately enough, the woman dressed in black. During the summer, when entire families would sit out on the street at night because of the heat, the men sat any way they wished but the women sat facing the wall of the building so they would not tempt other men by showing any other part of their legs. If, for whatever reason, a woman was seen nude by another man, or spent an extended time with another man without a chaperone, the presumption was that they had sex. If the women were unmarried, she had to marry the man or be disgraced forever, and possibly killed. The man had to marry her or face death himself. If the woman were married death was the accepted outcome. This whole set of traditions was integrated into the courtship process. If a man and woman wanted to marry, but her father refused, the daughter would ask for her mother's help to have the man spend the night with the woman to force the father to consent to the marriage. This was considered to be an "honor rape" and was a widely sanctioned process.

Not all ignorance can be blamed on religion, and religions cannot necessarily be blamed for ignorance.

Did I blame it on religion?

And the difference between your 50 year old anecdote and my 25 year old one: In Italy, things have changed for the better. In the Muslim world, a woman's plight has gotten worse.

Pete
01-11-2010, 12:34 PM
Some real examples of women in the bible. Ruth, Sarah, Eve, ....MARY! LOL!
Jesus interaction with women according to recorded history, not the history channels tabloid version. Just one of many of Jesus interactions with women, the woman at the well at midday divorced five times, disgraced in her current cultural context, addressed by Jesus with great love and respect. Jesus radically went against the cultural norm of viewing women as inferior,historical Christianity places much value on all humans

In that culture men did not speak to strange woman at the "well" which was a very well used gathering place for women,,,because that was part of their daily chores,,,and wells werent a dime a dozen

Just think what that lady's first initial thought to herself when he did do just that.
Just because woman didnt have the same rights that they do now doesnt mean they were abused. Just meant that was the culture,
I think today we take things to the extreme,,,from wearing burka's to boxing shorts

In theory woman do rule the world,,,, if you can rule the penis you can rule the man:D so maby its time to rethink whats really going on in the world today

Pete

K.Bullock
01-11-2010, 12:50 PM
In that culture men did not speak to strange woman at the "well" which was a very well used gathering place for women,,,because that was part of their daily chores,,,and wells werent a dime a dozen

Just think what that lady's first initial thought to herself when he did do just that.
Just because woman didnt have the same rights that they do now doesnt mean they were abused. Just meant that was the culture,
I think today we take things to the extreme,,,from wearing burka's to boxing shorts

In theory woman do rule the world,,,, if you can rule the penis you can rule the man:D so maby its time to rethink whats really going on in the world today

Pete
Pete she was Samaritan, Hebrews did not speak to them period, even worse she was a disgraced Samaritan. She was at the well at midday because that was when everyone else was at home. The decent villagers fetched water in the cool of the morning or evening.


LOL! You should do some writing for Conan O'Brien.

Cody Covey
01-11-2010, 02:00 PM
Keith your lack of understanding of other religions (Mormons don't believe Christ was a prophet) and Evolution (Evolution does not state we came from monkeys) is really astounding.

Pete
01-11-2010, 02:18 PM
Pete she was Samaritan, Hebrews did not speak to them period, even worse she was a disgraced Samaritan. She was at the well at midday because that was when everyone else was at home. The decent villagers fetched water in the cool of the morning or evening.



Yep you have added more insite on the matter than I

I dont know if me writing for Conan is meant to be a bad thing or a good thing:D
All I know some of these discussions are fun and often funny:razz:

Pete

Terri
01-11-2010, 05:07 PM
Did anyone notice that we got off of Islam and onto the Christian faith for a spell in this thread? There is a difference between Muslims just as there is a difference between Christians when it comes to believes. Also not all Muslims are Arabs. I know for a fact that Iranians are not Arabs and do not hold Arabs in very high esteem. When people of other cultures have been discussed in this thread it has been the religion that has been brought out to explain the behavior, but again I will say it is not the religion it is the culture.

I have been studying different cultures for 30 years, with a focus on the Middle East dating back 25 years. Not all of my knowledge comes from books. The 100's of books I have read were mostly written by people from that culture. Now when I read a book written by an outsider, I can pick up the errors or lack of cultural understanding. I have lived and spent many hours talking to people from different cultures, including people from the middle east. I must be blessed because I have not met many socially retarded people. Some odd, but I find people odd for many different reasons. I don't know too many haters. I did meet a hater from Spain who lives in this country. He stays for the money- his job. I don't know his religious view, but I doubt it has anything to do with why he hates America. He is just jealous that his country is not number one. He has an ego problem. Back in college I knew a hater from Syria, but after he spent a summer in jail back in his country his view of America changed. He saw the light. His hate was not based on religion, but on his dislike for America's international policy.

I grew up in a small town were it is recorded in the record books that 150 different Italian surnames exist. My family must have been happy to keep to their own kind. I know of many cities in this country that have areas reserved for only one group of people. Those areas are big time tourist attractions now. There are Italian blocks, Chinese blocks, German blocks, and the list goes on. There was a time in this country that people didn't go into a neighborhood that didn't have people of there own kind (ethnic group). Still today black people find it hard to be in certain "white" areas after a certain time (night). In the city I live in Russians and Indians are the big groups of new people. The older people stick together, but the young kids spread out into the larger community - they have friends of many different ethnic groups. It is a language problem for the older people. They are the ones who worry about being rejected by Americans. Fear holds them back from trusting their neighbors. Scares from the old country.

I'm not trying to down play terror threats in this country or aboard, but if you just point a figure at Islam I think you are missing the problem. The problem is with a culture not a religion. In the Middle East and Africa the people have continued to bring their culture into the religion. Many people who study Islam would say that isn't Islam. Oppressing women is not Islam, it is an Arab tribal practice. Removing female genitals is not Islamic, it is an African tribal practice. In Middle Eastern countries women don't take their husband' last name. They keep their father's last name. In this country, if a woman keeps her surname she is viewed at modern.

I really do not have a problem with Islam, but I do have a problem with the people who define and enforce their view of the religion on others. I find these people to be oppressors of freedom and free choice. I have a problem with Christian religions who try to oppress freedom and free choice. Luckily we see less and less force in this country by Christians and more teaching and living as an example of our faith. Our country is great because it is based on Christian teaching, but it is secular. Meaning we have a choice to practice as we each see fit. God wants me to come to him because I want to be with him, not because I'm forced to follow him. Islam is a young religion. Hopefully it will mature. I wish to see a day were it is not held hostage by evil men, who do not have God in their souls, but claim to work for God.

This is not the first time in history that God has been named as a co- defendant when it comes to man and his evil ways. A good book to read: "The Most Evil Men and Women in History" by Miranda Twiss. Religion is used by these people, but I would not consider them followers of God, but using his name in Vein.

Terri

zeus3925
01-11-2010, 05:29 PM
Well said, Terri!!

YardleyLabs
01-11-2010, 05:47 PM
Good post Terri.

dnf777
01-11-2010, 05:51 PM
Nicely said. I wish more people had your understanding and open eyes.

K.Bullock
01-11-2010, 06:13 PM
Terri, I agree with a lot of what you have to say except for one inescapable fact. The exclamation "Allah Akbar!" usually precedes the carnage of an explosion loosed in an area populated by non-Muslims, and the cry "Allah Akbar" is usually heard coming from the mouths of those rejoicing at the news of a successful attack. It is not cultural it is religious, the exclamation can be heard in nearly every country of the world, because the koran can only be translated in Arabic the same cry is heard from Africa, eastern Asia, and in the streets of Manhattan.

It strikes me as kind of ironic that in the same paragraph you slam Christians for forcing their religion down peoples throats, one sentence later you are glad to live in a Christian country that allows freedom of religion. Is that a new development? I don't think so ... but what is new is this weird self hatred that Americans and some claiming to be "enlightened" Christians have for themselves. It is new and strange.

Traveling the world should have taught you something about how blessed this country is ...is that an accident?

Franco
01-11-2010, 08:10 PM
Our country is great because it is based on Christian teaching, but it is secular. Meaning we have a choice to practice as we each see fit.



I think our country is great because of our western European roots, abundant natural resourses and in the past, an independent and pioneering people. Great inventors, scientist, engineers, teachers and hard working labor made us great. That was our foundation and that is what made us so great in the last century!

Lets don't forget that the man that penned our Declaration Of Independence and many of our founding fathers were Deist, or Agnostic.

Terri
01-11-2010, 08:15 PM
I'm not a self hating American. I didn't slam Christians in my post. I just realize that just because I see myself as a Christian someone of a different branch of Christianity would think otherwise. I have been told before I was not really a Christian because I was raised Catholic. The lady who told me this was not being mean, just blinded by what she saw as the truth accounting to what she had been taught in her church. So a person can claim to be anything they want to be, some will agree and others will disagree with the label.

The Koran has been translated into many different languages, even English. My point is just because you have a Koran doesn't mean you will read it, can totally understand it, and that the next person who reads it will get the same meaning from reading it that you received. The same problem exists with the Bible. These are not easy books to understand.

Religion is a very complex subject, that is why there are so many different religions. You can use religion to bring peace into your life or use religion to bring pain to yourself and others.

My whole point in getting into this thread was not to judge religion, but to judge cultures. The terrorist have been brain washed and they were raised in a culture that allows them to be easy prey to such tactics. How many of the so called religious leaders are strapping on the bombs so they will be able to partake in the fruits of heaven? The leaders do not really believe what they tell their followers. Religion is not what drives them.


Terri

K.Bullock
01-11-2010, 09:23 PM
I'm not a self hating American. I didn't slam Christians in my post. I just realize that just because I see myself as a Christian someone of a different branch of Christianity would think otherwise. I have been told before I was not really a Christian because I was raised Catholic. The lady who told me this was not being mean, just blinded by what she saw as the truth accounting to what she had been taught in her church. So a person can claim to be anything they want to be, some will agree and others will disagree with the label.

The Koran has been translated into many different languages, even English. My point is just because you have a Koran doesn't mean you will read it, can totally understand it, and that the next person who reads it will get the same meaning from reading it that you received. The same problem exists with the Bible. These are not easy books to understand.

Religion is a very complex subject, that is why there are so many different religions. You can use religion to bring peace into your life or use religion to bring pain to yourself and others.

My whole point in getting into this thread was not to judge religion, but to judge cultures. The terrorist have been brain washed and they were raised in a culture that allows them to be easy prey to such tactics. How many of the so called religious leaders are strapping on the bombs so they will be able to partake in the fruits of heaven? The leaders do not really believe what they tell their followers. Religion is not what drives them.


Terri

Terri, your experience with one ...one..lady clouds your entire view of Christians and western civilization. But scores of terrorists that are all Islamic have nothing to do with the religion. See how I could have trouble swallowing that line of reasoning?

Hmm, I don't think religion is complex at all. Of course I am not trying to start from scratch and have little patience for sycophancy.I don't care what their reasons are for trying to kill us.

How many are dead at Fort hood because the government is too cowardly to call a spade a spade for fear of being called discriminatory. BTW what was the fort hood shooters culture? Was he a dumb farm kid from some boon dock desert town?

If the muslims are so peaceful then why are muslims not out in the street setting cars on fire to voice their displeasure with the terrorists? Why are Christians having to leave or be killed in Muslim controlled territory?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100110/ts_nm/us_malaysia_religion



http://www.persecution.com/public/newsroom.aspx?clickfrom=bWFpbl9tZW51

Terri
01-11-2010, 10:54 PM
Terri, your experience with one ...one..lady clouds your entire view of Christians and western civilization. But scores of terrorists that are all Islamic have nothing to do with the religion. See how I could have trouble swallowing that line of reasoning?

Hmm, I don't think religion is complex at all. Of course I am not trying to start from scratch and have little patience for sycophancy.I don't care what their reasons are for trying to kill us.

How many are dead at Fort hood because the government is too cowardly to call a spade a spade for fear of being called discriminatory. BTW what was the fort hood shooters culture? Was he a dumb farm kid from some boon dock desert town?

If the muslims are so peaceful then why are muslims not out in the street setting cars on fire to voice their displeasure with the terrorists? Why are Christians having to leave or be killed in Muslim controlled territory?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100110/ts_nm/us_malaysia_religion



http://www.persecution.com/public/newsroom.aspx?clickfrom=bWFpbl9tZW51

I'm not clouded in my view of Christians, I just gave an example of what one person calls another person does not make it true or false. If you don't find religion complex I think you are in the minority. People have been studying religion for a long time and have a hard time agreeing on what path God wants us to follow. I think we will never understand another person's faith, but we can understand cultures. With understanding of a culture you can win wars. During the Vietnam war the Vietnam leaders studied our culture and that is why we lost the war. As soldiers our boys I believe were the better soldiers, but that is not the only way to win a war. Our cultural weakness at seeing death for the first time in our living rooms was too much for the people of our country. The Vietnam leaders, knew that with time we would give up and return home. They were studying us. They were right. We need to know our enemy better than he knows himself, not just make things up. I just don't think we will every be able to generalize a groups religious believes. Culture is a lot easier to study, understand, and control.

Terri

Terri
01-11-2010, 11:01 PM
Terri, I agree with a lot of what you have to say except for one inescapable fact. The exclamation "Allah Akbar!" usually precedes the carnage of an explosion loosed in an area populated by non-Muslims, and the cry "Allah Akbar" is usually heard coming from the mouths of those rejoicing at the news of a successful attack. It is not cultural it is religious, the exclamation can be heard in nearly every country of the world, because the koran can only be translated in Arabic the same cry is heard from Africa, eastern Asia, and in the streets of Manhattan.

It strikes me as kind of ironic that in the same paragraph you slam Christians for forcing their religion down peoples throats, one sentence later you are glad to live in a Christian country that allows freedom of religion. Is that a new development? I don't think so ... but what is new is this weird self hatred that Americans and some claiming to be "enlightened" Christians have for themselves. It is new and strange.

Traveling the world should have taught you something about how blessed this country is ...is that an accident?

As for being called an "enlightened" christian, I have never heard a Catholic referenced as "enlightened". I guess there has to be a first for everything.

I have traveled a lot, but I never had to leave home to love my country.
Terri

zeus3925
01-11-2010, 11:48 PM
Terri, you raise a good point here. We will be unable to defeat the Jihadists if we do not fully understand the culture in which it was spawned. "They hate us because of our freedom" doesn't cut it. Writing Islam off by saying, "They all hate us", isn't going to work either. To best way to defeat the Jihadists before us is to understand there culture in depth. That knowledge has to be accurate and in depth. Only then can we develop a successful strategy for victory.

K.Bullock
01-12-2010, 12:25 AM
I'm not clouded in my view of Christians, I just gave an example of what one person calls another person does not make it true or false. If you don't find religion complex I think you are in the minority. People have been studying religion for a long time and have a hard time agreeing on what path God wants us to follow. I think we will never understand another person's faith, but we can understand cultures. With understanding of a culture you can win wars. During the Vietnam war the Vietnam leaders studied our culture and that is why we lost the war. As soldiers our boys I believe were the better soldiers, but that is not the only way to win a war. Our cultural weakness at seeing death for the first time in our living rooms was too much for the people of our country. The Vietnam leaders, knew that with time we would give up and return home. They were studying us. They were right. We need to know our enemy better than he knows himself, not just make things up. I just don't think we will every be able to generalize a groups religious believes. Culture is a lot easier to study, understand, and control.

Terri

Ok then, how do we understand a Saudi apart from their faith? Or does their faith have no impact on their culture?I would think that to learn about a Saudi we would have to learn about their faith or we would have an incomplete understanding of them.

david gibson
01-12-2010, 12:34 AM
Terri, you raise a good point here. We will be unable to defeat the Jihadists if we do not fully understand the culture in which it was spawned. "They hate us because of our freedom" doesn't cut it. Writing Islam off by saying, "They all hate us", isn't going to work either. To best way to defeat the Jihadists before us is to understand there culture in depth. That knowledge has to be accurate and in depth. Only then can we develop a successful strategy for victory.


so we have to "understand" why they circumcise women???
we have to "understand" why they forbid them to attend school?
we have to "understand" why they still stone women to death if they are so disrespectful to allow themselves to be brutally raped?


yeah, we just need to sit down and talk and "understand" them. its so simple. then they will love us and all will be wonderful.


if thats all it takes, then we are in luck! thats what our muslim president is going to do, i cant wait to see how well he succeeds! he is doing such a great job already! cant you just feel the love??

Terri
01-12-2010, 01:02 AM
Ok then, how do we understand a Saudi apart from their faith? Or does their faith have no impact on their culture?I would think that to learn about a Saudi we would have to learn about their faith or we would have an incomplete understanding of them.

I think the culture has an affect on how they view what the Koren teaches. They use the Koran to justify their behavior not the other way around.

Terri

K.Bullock
01-12-2010, 08:45 AM
I think the culture has an affect on how they view what the Koren teaches. They use the Koran to justify their behavior not the other way around.

Terri
http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/pick/007.htm

How do you interpret this or the texts in surah 5 that quote Muhammad saying Christians are monkeys and jews are pigs or another text that says the beloved profit commands the killing of Jews so even bushes will yell the location of a Jew trying to hide.

The Koran attacks Christianity and Judaism throughout it's texts how can it be interpreted any other way? I given a link to an online translation of the koran, read for your self. I just don't see where peace and love are the reigning theme. LOL!


2 (It is) a Scripture that is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) - so let there be no heaviness in thy heart therefrom - that thou mayst warn thereby, and (it is) a Reminder unto believers.

3 (Saying): Follow that which is sent down unto you from your Lord, and follow no protecting friends beside Him. Little do ye recollect!

4 How many a township have We destroyed! As a raid by night, or while they slept at noon, Our terror came unto them.

So if it is not the religion that is violent what you seem to be saying it is that their culture is violent. Are you comfortable saying that?

I would agree that the muslim religion was birthed from a violent culture, muhammad was a violent thief, rapist, and terrorist in his own right(according to the koran) which spread his brand new religion by the sword in the middle east so I guess yes, in that context you are right.I would also say though the religion keeps the culture from moving into peace when the rest of the world around it is.

zeus3925
01-12-2010, 09:04 AM
FYI

http://freep.com/article/20100112/NEWS05/100112009/1322/Muslim-rally-organizer-claims-death-threats

dnf777
01-12-2010, 09:13 AM
I'm not clouded in my view of Christians, I just gave an example of what one person calls another person does not make it true or false. If you don't find religion complex I think you are in the minority. People have been studying religion for a long time and have a hard time agreeing on what path God wants us to follow. I think we will never understand another person's faith, but we can understand cultures. With understanding of a culture you can win wars. During the Vietnam war the Vietnam leaders studied our culture and that is why we lost the war. As soldiers our boys I believe were the better soldiers, but that is not the only way to win a war. Our cultural weakness at seeing death for the first time in our living rooms was too much for the people of our country. The Vietnam leaders, knew that with time we would give up and return home. They were studying us. They were right. We need to know our enemy better than he knows himself, not just make things up. I just don't think we will every be able to generalize a groups religious believes. Culture is a lot easier to study, understand, and control.

Terri

Terri,
I appreciate all you've said here. I too have been merely stating that we must find the root of the problem, which requires a cultural literacy. The standard "they hate freedom" is a very superficial, convenient explanation, that does not address the true issues. I have made that point several times recently, and have been flamed for being too sympathetic to muslims, etc... Its nice to hear another voice of reason. There's only about three or four here! :D

I think much of the demonization of Islam by Bush-sympathizers is an ill-fated attempt to justify an ill-begotten war retrospectively. Yes, there are violent radicals that need to be expedited on their quest for 40 virgins or 40 bushels of grapes, but to paint all of Islam with that brush is ignorant at best, racist at worst. Everyone on this list is far more likely to be harmed by a deranged middle-aged overweight alcoholic divorced unemployed white male with cheesy facial hair who still lives with his mother, run amock in a shopping mall than anyone named Ahmed!

On that note, Cheers!

Hoosier
01-12-2010, 09:18 AM
I think to understand Islamic violence, you need to understand their view of "greater and lesser jihad". I have done some reading about it but not enough to explain it. The jist of it though is that each Muslim has to struggle with their own faith, which is the 'greater jihad', and the also struggle to spread that faith to others 'lesser jihad'. The problem comes from how they interpret their role in the lesser jihad.

Pete
01-12-2010, 09:25 AM
I think much of the demonization of Islam by Bush-sympathizers is an ill-fated attempt to justify an ill-begotten war retrospectively. Yes, there are violent radicals that need to be expedited on their quest for 40 virgins or 40 bushels of grapes, but to paint all of Islam with that brush is ignorant at best, racist at worst. Everyone on this list is far

You know whats so facinating about liberals

A person a can,, "hey that black guy Punched me in the nose"
And the liberal says hey why does that guy think all black people ,punch people in the noses

Crazy man crazy

P

K.Bullock
01-12-2010, 09:42 AM
Terri,
I appreciate all you've said here. I too have been merely stating that we must find the root of the problem, which requires a cultural literacy. The standard "they hate freedom" is a very superficial, convenient explanation, that does not address the true issues. I have made that point several times recently, and have been flamed for being too sympathetic to muslims, etc... Its nice to hear another voice of reason. There's only about three or four here! :D

I think much of the demonization of Islam by Bush-sympathizers is an ill-fated attempt to justify an ill-begotten war retrospectively. Yes, there are violent radicals that need to be expedited on their quest for 40 virgins or 40 bushels of grapes, but to paint all of Islam with that brush is ignorant at best, racist at worst. Everyone on this list is far more likely to be harmed by a deranged middle-aged overweight alcoholic divorced unemployed white male with cheesy facial hair who still lives with his mother, run amock in a shopping mall than anyone named Ahmed!

On that note, Cheers!

:) At least all of what you have written is not just based on knee jerk emotionalism, it can all be backed up by real fact. Especially the fuzzy white guy part ....brilliant. And double D drat! How did you know we were just saying all this to defend ex president Bush? I guess it's time to try some other tact to defend the Bush presidency now that we have been found out.

david gibson
01-12-2010, 09:58 AM
Terri,


I think much of the demonization of Islam by Bush-sympathizers is an ill-fated attempt to justify an ill-begotten war retrospectively. Yes, there are violent radicals that need to be expedited on their quest for 40 virgins or 40 bushels of grapes, but to paint all of Islam with that brush is ignorant at best, racist at worst. Everyone on this list is far more likely to be harmed by a deranged middle-aged overweight alcoholic divorced unemployed white male with cheesy facial hair who still lives with his mother, run amock in a shopping mall than anyone named Ahmed!

On that note, Cheers!

oh really? you really believe this??

prove to me that "deranged middle-aged overweight alcoholic divorced unemployed white male with cheesy facial hair who still lives with his mother" have killed over 3,000 people and are plotting to kill more and more.

second, most of us against islam were that way well before Bush was even in office. remember the USS Cole? The Marine base in Jordan? the list goes on.
just the killing of 3,000 innocent people that were mothers, fathers, and loved relatives by many is plenty to get us roiled at islam, we dont need justifying a war to feel that way.

liberalism truly is a mental disorder

K G
01-12-2010, 11:18 AM
Terri,I think much of the demonization of Islam by Bush-sympathizers is an ill-fated attempt to justify an ill-begotten war retrospectively.

Wow.....:eek:.....talk about "out on a limb"....:rolleyes:

Hope you've got a nice cushion to land on (and the tree's not too tall) when that limb breaks regards,

kg

YardleyLabs
01-12-2010, 11:49 AM
Whether because of family ties or his own sense of justice, President Bush was always extremely careful to distinguish between the radical Islamists committed to attacking the US and the overwhelming bulk of Muslims who might or might not like America, but are basically interested in living their own lives in peace.

david gibson
01-12-2010, 12:18 PM
Whether because of family ties or his own sense of justice, President Bush was always extremely careful to distinguish between the radical Islamists committed to attacking the US and the overwhelming bulk of Muslims who might or might not like America, but are basically interested in living their own lives in peace.

ever heard of "political correctness"??

its like obama saying he is christian.

K.Bullock
01-12-2010, 01:41 PM
FYI

http://freep.com/article/20100112/NEWS05/100112009/1322/Muslim-rally-organizer-claims-death-threats

Today

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/world/europe/13britain.html

dnf777
01-12-2010, 02:15 PM
oh really? you really believe this??

prove to me that "deranged middle-aged overweight alcoholic divorced unemployed white male with cheesy facial hair who still lives with his mother" have killed over 3,000 people and are plotting to kill more and more.

second, most of us against islam were that way well before Bush was even in office. remember the USS Cole? The Marine base in Jordan? the list goes on.
just the killing of 3,000 innocent people that were mothers, fathers, and loved relatives by many is plenty to get us roiled at islam, we dont need justifying a war to feel that way.

liberalism truly is a mental disorder

The chances of being the victom of domestic violence or work-place violence FAR outweighs the chances of being a terrorist victom. Do you know what the NUMBER ONE cause of death is for pregnant women in the US??

If you deny these facts, whatever ideology you subscribe to is a bigger mental disorder.

K.Bullock
01-12-2010, 02:35 PM
The chances of being the victom of domestic violence or work-place violence FAR outweighs the chances of being a terrorist victom. Do you know what the NUMBER ONE cause of death is for pregnant women in the US??

If you deny these facts, whatever ideology you subscribe to is a bigger mental disorder.

Not only that, look how many people are hurt in lawn mower accidents, Holy cow! Way more than have been killed by terrorists in America. No denying that one, if you do you where your moms pants on Saturdays.

Hew
01-12-2010, 03:18 PM
I think much of the demonization of Islam by Bush-sympathizers is an ill-fated attempt to justify an ill-begotten war retrospectively.
That's exactly right. It was until well after we invaded Iraq that Americans began to think of Islam as anything but the religion of peace. Afterall, we're a forgiving people. Munich, Entebbe, highjacking planes? Peeshaw. 52 American's held hostage in Iran for more than a year? Fuhgitaboutit. 300 plus Marines killed in Lebanon? They deserve a gimme. Lockerbie? We're still good. Khobar, World Trade Center Bombing, USS Cole? A few bad apples, apparently. Bomb our embassy in Africa? We had insurance. 9-11? Ya know, we probably brought that on ourselves somewhat. Criticize Bush for invading Iraq? Oh no, now you've gone too damn far, my friend. It's go time on some Muslim hatin'. Brilliant stuff, there, DNF. Top-notch anaylsyis. Top-notch. Fresca, anyone? Hmmm? Hmmm?

dnf777
01-12-2010, 03:37 PM
That's exactly right. It was until well after we invaded Iraq that Americans began to think of Islam as anything but the religion of peace. Afterall, we're a forgiving people. Munich, Entebbe, highjacking planes? Peeshaw. 52 American's held hostage in Iran for more than a year? Fuhgitaboutit. 300 plus Marines killed in Lebanon? They deserve a gimme. Lockerbie? We're still good. Khobar, World Trade Center Bombing, USS Cole? A few bad apples, apparently. Bomb our embassy in Africa? We had insurance. 9-11? Ya know, we probably brought that on ourselves somewhat. Criticize Bush for invading Iraq? Oh no, now you've gone too damn far, my friend. It's go time on some Muslim hatin'. Brilliant stuff, there, DNF. Top-notch anaylsyis. Top-notch. Fresca, anyone? Hmmm? Hmmm?

Remind me Hew, what was Reagan's response to the Lebanon bombing that killed 300 of our troops?

I understand what you're saying, but what's your point? Should we nuke every Islamic nation, or every nation that has more than what, 80% Muslims? We could consult UB's chart to determine where to draw the "kill 'em all, let God sort them out" line.

road kill
01-12-2010, 03:42 PM
Remind me Hew, what was Reagan's response to the Lebanon bombing that killed 300 of our troops?

I understand what you're saying, but what's your point? Should we nuke every Islamic nation, or every nation that has more than what, 80% Muslims? We could consult UB's chart to determine where to draw the "kill 'em all, let God sort them out" line.
Do you think the terrorists think all Americans are evil?

If not, do you think they discriminate on which of the civilians they kill or do the just kill any and all they can??

Just askin....


rk

code3retrievers
01-12-2010, 04:29 PM
The chances of being the victom of domestic violence or work-place violence FAR outweighs the chances of being a terrorist victom. Do you know what the NUMBER ONE cause of death is for pregnant women in the US??

If you deny these facts, whatever ideology you subscribe to is a bigger mental disorder.

Once again do you actually have a point? Are you actually comparing domestic violence with Islamic Terrorism?

Typical liberal stupidity!

Franco
01-12-2010, 05:16 PM
I was walking down the road and saw an Afghanistan guy named Abdul standing on his fifth floor apartment balcony shaking a small rug. I shouted up to him, "What's wrong, Abdul? Won't it start?"

YardleyLabs
01-12-2010, 05:50 PM
I was walking down the road and saw an Afghanistan guy named Abdul standing on his fifth floor apartment balcony shaking a small rug. I shouted up to him, "What's wrong, Abdul? Won't it start?"
Now he was simply cleaning his rug. You, however, may be having an issue.....:D

Franco
01-12-2010, 05:55 PM
Now he was simply cleaning his rug. You, however, may be having an issue.....:D



My life is full of issues!:D

Like last weekend; Duck hunt or watch NFL playoffs, what to do? Cold front brought the ducks down but, who wants to hunt when it's 35 degrees!

Sunny and 54 today, maybe I'll go tomorrow.;-)

Terri
01-12-2010, 06:19 PM
You guys really do have a hard time staying on topic. Everything from Bush bashing to NFL football. President Bush didn't start the problems in the Middle East and he did not solve the problems. How many more threads are going to lead back to him? I like football, but how does it relate to the topic?

Back to the topic. Dr. Savage always says: boarders, language, and culture. He doesn't say religion. I'm sure he spent some time coming up with that line. He is a smart man why did he just chose those three areas to hang his hat?

Terri

dnf777
01-12-2010, 07:50 PM
Once again do you actually have a point? Are you actually comparing domestic violence with Islamic Terrorism?

Typical liberal stupidity!

If you're too stupid to see the point, then you shouldn't call others stupid! That's all. ;-)

dnf777
01-12-2010, 07:58 PM
Do you think the terrorists think all Americans are evil?

If not, do you think they discriminate on which of the civilians they kill or do the just kill any and all they can??

Just askin....


rk

No, they do not discriminate. I tend to put myself AND YOU, and most Americans above that level of barbarism however. If others want to put themselves on the same level of Islamic radical terrorists, that's there business. Thank goodness they don't represent the USA, or our core values.

Terri,
As for blaming Bush...NO, he did NOT start this mess. But he certainly contributed to it in the largest way in recent history. Nobody had a problem when he gave his excellent speech 9/12, about getting those responsible. But then what happened? Many people around the world feel that he launched a religiously motivated attack against Islam, as there was no focus, in fact, de-focus upon those likely responsible for 9-11.

Now, before I get flamed, I'm just pointing out how many others, including many Muslims feel around the world. Personally, I don't give a rat's arse what they think, but like YOU pointed out, not recognizing the root causes of conflict, is likely to perpetuate it, rather than seek a solution.

Franco
01-12-2010, 08:06 PM
You guys really do have a hard time staying on topic. Everything from Bush bashing to NFL football. President Bush didn't start the problems in the Middle East and he did not solve the problems. How many more threads are going to lead back to him? I like football, but how does it relate to the topic?

Back to the topic. Dr. Savage always says: boarders, language, and culture. He doesn't say religion. I'm sure he spent some time coming up with that line. He is a smart man why did he just chose those three areas to hang his hat?

Terri

Doc Savage, he's fun to listen to. I love his boarders, language, culture...I used it as my sig line here for months! I also love his, "Liberalism is a mental disorder" quote.

Football relates to the topic because if you didn't like Football, then you would be an unpatriotic infadel!;-)

Hew
01-13-2010, 07:16 AM
Michael Savage has a mental disorder, too.

Pete
01-13-2010, 08:56 AM
I just Love to listen to Michael Savage
he is funnier than hell and alot smarter than me,,
I'd vote for him for president,,,and yes I think part of him has a mental disorder and thats what makes him funny.
But in theory he's is the most entertaining and informative talk show guy out there
:p:p:p He makes me smile
p

paul young
01-13-2010, 10:04 AM
Remind me Hew, what was Reagan's response to the Lebanon bombing that killed 300 of our troops?

I understand what you're saying, but what's your point? Should we nuke every Islamic nation, or every nation that has more than what, 80% Muslims? We could consult UB's chart to determine where to draw the "kill 'em all, let God sort them out" line.

......crickets chirping......

Hew
01-13-2010, 12:39 PM
......crickets chirping......
Why, Paul, I'm flattered you hang on my every word. But you gotta help me out a little here. Which of DNF's questions would you like me answer, Paul? The one that everybody aleady knows the answer to and has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion. Reagan pulled us out of Lebanon. Happy now? Now you're forcing DNF to post again (as if that takes any arm twisting) with some irrelevent and disjointed point. Nobody wins, now.

Or were you looking for me to seriously answer whether I support nuking every islamic country?

Or perhaps you wanted me to answer what my point was with my previous post? That was pretty evident. It was a sarcastic mocking of DNF's notion that mistrust/fear/repulsion of Islam was ginned up after the fact to cover the invasion of Iraq.

Hope that helped and silenced your cricket chirping issues.

Evan
01-13-2010, 02:18 PM
This morning, from a cave somewhere in Pakistan , Taliban Minister of Migration Mohammed Omar warned the United States that if Military actions against Iraq and Afghanistan continues, Taliban authorities intend to cut off America 's supply of Convenience Store Managers and possibly Motel 6 & Super 8 Managers.


And, if this action does not yield sufficient results, cab drivers will be next, followed by DELL and AOL Customer Service Reps.

Finally, if all else fails, they have threatened to send us no more candidates for President of the United States !

Folks, it's gonna get ugly!

Evan

dnf777
01-13-2010, 04:39 PM
......crickets chirping......

Paul,
I actually prefer the sound of crickets chirping. At least it serves a purpose in the universe. My point will not be understood by those with the blinders of ideology on. Especially while they're still ducking their heads in the aftermath of their party's 8 year fiasco.

K G
01-13-2010, 04:50 PM
Paul,
I actually prefer the sound of crickets chirping. At least it serves a purpose in the universe. My point will not be understood by those with the blinders of ideology on. Especially while they're still ducking their heads in the aftermath of their party's 8 year fiasco.

At least the CURRENT, as in "present time," fiasco will only last 4 years...;-)

kg

Evan
01-13-2010, 05:21 PM
At least the CURRENT, as in "present time," fiasco will only last 4 years...;-)

kgI pray that this is so.

Evan

dnf777
01-13-2010, 09:04 PM
At least the CURRENT, as in "present time," fiasco will only last 4 years...;-)

kg

Ya think so? Put Palin up against Obama in '12, and it's guaranteed to go another 4 years....no matter WHO wins that one! :(

Boy, THAT would ripen the waters for an independent!

K G
01-13-2010, 10:01 PM
The lefties LOVE making that prognostication....ain't gonna happen. No way does she get the GOP nomination.

No way.

kg

Franco
01-13-2010, 10:07 PM
Lot of righties making that prognostication too.

It seems from the outside that the GOP leadership has tried to distance themselves from Mrs Palin knowing she would run far more voters away than what she would attract.

dnf777
01-13-2010, 10:10 PM
The lefties LOVE making that prognostication....ain't gonna happen. No way does she get the GOP nomination.

No way.

kg

Not sayin she is....just if she does.

I think she's sealed her political future as a commentator...where she can serve as a catalyst for the extreme right. I'm not sure if they'll ever make her into a magnet for the female vote, even in the republican party. The only thing shorter than her political future as a viable candidate, will be the skirts the fox producers give her to wear.

K G
01-13-2010, 10:33 PM
Lot of righties making that prognostication too.


I just don't see 'em...or maybe I ignore them for a good reason.


I think she's sealed her political future as a commentator...where she can serve as a catalyst for the extreme right. I'm not sure if they'll ever make her into a magnet for the female vote, even in the republican party. The only thing shorter than her political future as a viable candidate, will be the skirts the fox producers give her to wear.

She is a non-factor to MANY conservatives, myself included, whether she's running for office or on TV. I don't watch O'Reilly either, so whatever he/Fox does to promote her doesn't impact me. She's on Fox for the short-term, IMHO...

kg

K.Bullock
01-13-2010, 10:33 PM
Not sayin she is....just if she does.

I think she's sealed her political future as a commentator...where she can serve as a catalyst for the extreme right. I'm not sure if they'll ever make her into a magnet for the female vote, even in the republican party. The only thing shorter than her political future as a viable candidate, will be the skirts the fox producers give her to wear.

:) Ya know just when I begin to think that liberals are from outer space. You have to hand to a bunch that can boldly stand up as the defenders of the weak and disenfranchised and still get away with being sexist and racist. ..brilliant just brilliant. ...bravisimo!

Terri
01-13-2010, 11:29 PM
No, they do not discriminate. I tend to put myself AND YOU, and most Americans above that level of barbarism however. If others want to put themselves on the same level of Islamic radical terrorists, that's there business. Thank goodness they don't represent the USA, or our core values.

Terri,
As for blaming Bush...NO, he did NOT start this mess. But he certainly contributed to it in the largest way in recent history. Nobody had a problem when he gave his excellent speech 9/12, about getting those responsible. But then what happened? Many people around the world feel that he launched a religiously motivated attack against Islam, as there was no focus, in fact, de-focus upon those likely responsible for 9-11.

Now, before I get flamed, I'm just pointing out how many others, including many Muslims feel around the world. Personally, I don't give a rat's arse what they think, but like YOU pointed out, not recognizing the root causes of conflict, is likely to perpetuate it, rather than seek a solution.

I think President Bush did go to Afghanistan to fight the terrorist, but didn't he also say he would go after anyone else who aided terrorist? That did leave the door wide open. I think the Iraqi dictator made thinks a little muddy because he wasn't wanting to follow the sanctions. Then he started mouthing off about weapons of mass destruction. Yes, there were no weapons of any real number, but only a few science guys in Iraq knew that. Saddam didn't even know he didn't have the weapons to back up what he was saying. I remember a lot of people in the "know" were saying he have weapons of mass destruction.

As for the religious war only some people thing it is a religious war. The terrorist leaders have been trying to push that point with very little success. That is why we hear the terrorist are extreme radical Muslims, meaning just a small percentage of Muslims. I understand that some people on here think the small group is big, but it could be a lot worse if it is made into a holy war. Since people who follow Islam do not see themselves as one big group we don't need to help the terrorist make it a religious war, keep it at the cultural or national level.

Terri

JDogger
01-13-2010, 11:58 PM
I think President Bush did go to Afghanistan to fight the terrorist, but didn't he also say he would go after anyone else who aided terrorist? That did leave the door wide open. I think the Iraqi dictator made thinks a little muddy because he wasn't wanting to follow the sanctions. Then he started mouthing off about weapons of mass destruction. Yes, there were no weapons of any real number, but only a few science guys in Iraq knew that. Saddam didn't even know he didn't have the weapons to back up what he was saying. I remember a lot of people in the "know" were saying he have weapons of mass destruction.

As for the religious war only some people thing it is a religious war. The terrorist leaders have been trying to push that point with very little success. That is why we hear the terrorist are extreme radical Muslims, meaning just a small percentage of Muslims. I understand that some people on here think the small group is big, but it could be a lot worse if it is made into a holy war. Since people who follow Islam do not see themselves as one big group we don't need to help the terrorist make it a religious war, keep it at the cultural or national level.

Terri

I find it to be more than a little disingenuous, when those that cite justification for war to be lack of compliance with UN sanctions, then urge withdrawal from that body.
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/ll176/JDoggger/smilies/nilly.gif

JD

BonMallari
01-14-2010, 12:15 AM
Not sayin she is....just if she does.

I think she's sealed her political future as a commentator...where she can serve as a catalyst for the extreme right. I'm not sure if they'll ever make her into a magnet for the female vote, even in the republican party. The only thing shorter than her political future as a viable candidate, will be the skirts the fox producers give her to wear.

she cant compete with Megyn Kelly, Julie Banderas, or Juliet Huddy on the best legs on Fox ;-)

But you heart is in the right place

I know ladies thats a chauvinistic attitude....

" She's got Legs, she know how to use them " regards

david gibson
01-14-2010, 12:49 AM
This morning, from a cave somewhere in Pakistan , Taliban Minister of Migration Mohammed Omar warned the United States that if Military actions against Iraq and Afghanistan continues, Taliban authorities intend to cut off America 's supply of Convenience Store Managers and possibly Motel 6 & Super 8 Managers.


And, if this action does not yield sufficient results, cab drivers will be next, followed by DELL and AOL Customer Service Reps.

Finally, if all else fails, they have threatened to send us no more candidates for President of the United States !

Folks, it's gonna get ugly!

Evan


pure gold there....thanks for the chuckles!

Hew
01-14-2010, 07:11 AM
It seems from the outside that the GOP leadership has tried to distance themselves from Mrs Palin knowing she would run far more voters away than what she would attract.
Ah yes, the same GOP "leadership" and appartchiks that are responsible for the party's banishment into the wilderness and John McCain as a presidential candidate. The same gutless wonders and backroom dealers who were content to sit meekly in the corner proclaiming, "what can we do...we're in the minority now" as Obama bulldozed them. It wasn't until this past summer of discontent, with the teabaggers and health care forum dissent, that they felt safe to pop their heads up out of the burrow like prairie dogs, stick their fingers in the wind, and determine that it was absolutely safe for them to put up some sort of fight. One of the few and first conservatives to put up any kind of fight or push-back and demonstrate that Obama could be opposed was Palin. She followed her gut and her principles. The GOP "leadership" followed her. I don't know if Palin should be the '12 nominee or not, but I know that she's got more balls than most of the GOP "leadership." I also know that I have more faith in Palin then I do the country club, pinkies-up GOP old guard that gots us where we are today. If those get along/go along types don't like her then that's all the reason more for me to listen to what she's got to say.

Franco
01-14-2010, 10:52 AM
Ah yes, the same GOP "leadership" and appartchiks that are responsible for the party's banishment into the wilderness and John McCain as a presidential candidate. The same gutless wonders and backroom dealers who were content to sit meekly in the corner proclaiming, "what can we do...we're in the minority now" as Obama bulldozed them. It wasn't until this past summer of discontent, with the teabaggers and health care forum dissent, that they felt safe to pop their heads up out of the burrow like prairie dogs, stick their fingers in the wind, and determine that it was absolutely safe for them to put up some sort of fight. One of the few and first conservatives to put up any kind of fight or push-back and demonstrate that Obama could be opposed was Palin. She followed her gut and her principles. The GOP "leadership" followed her. I don't know if Palin should be the '12 nominee or not, but I know that she's got more balls than most of the GOP "leadership." I also know that I have more faith in Palin then I do the country club, pinkies-up GOP old guard that gots us where we are today. If those get along/go along types don't like her then that's all the reason more for me to listen to what she's got to say.

What's the old saying, "Hell has no greater furry than a woman scorned"?

Uncle Bill
01-15-2010, 01:27 PM
For those that believe it's ONLY the 'extremists and jihadists that we need to be concerned about...ALL the other Muslims are OK, what's your answer to actions like these? UB




>
>
> Wake up America!!
>
> What Happened to Fordson High School, Dearborn, MI USA?
>
> Is this the future of America? When Minister Trey Hancock baptized a
> teenage friend of his son, he had little reason to believe he was
> unleashing
>
> a jihad of bigotry. The teenager had attended his church for over two
> years, but when the teenager entered high school the baptism would set
> into
> motion the persecution of a string of Christians. Did these Christians
> live
> in Indonesia, Iran, or Saudi Arabia?
>
> No, they live in Dearborn, Mich.
>
> The most prominent victim is Gerald Marszalek, one of America's most
> successful wrestling coaches; he was fired during the ugly chain of events
> by Fordson High School principal Imad Fadlallah. Marszalek's "crimes" -
> allowing this Christian convert on the wrestling team, and allowing Trey
> Hancock to volunteer as assistant coach. Marszalek has filed a wrongful
> termination suit against Fadlallah and the public school district.
>
> "We are getting a glimpse of what happens when Muslims who refuse to
> accept
> American values and principles gain political power in an American
> community," said Richard Thompson of the Thomas More Law Center, a
> national public interest law firm. "Failure to renew coach Marszalek's
> contract had nothing to do with wrestling and everything to do with
> religion," surmises Thompson.
>
> During the summer of 2005, the young man decided he wanted to be baptized
> to
>
> publicly acknowledge his conversion to Christianity. These events all
> occurred before his freshman year at Fordson High School.
>
> Principal Fadlallah became violent after hearing of the student's
> conversion. The lawsuit reads, "Subsequently, in full view of students and
> faculty" the suit reads , "Defendant Fadlallah approached the young
> Fordson
> student who had chosen to be baptized a Christian, punched the student,
> and
> advised the student that he had 'disgraced his family' by converting to
> Christianity from Islam."
>
> Next, Fadlallah fired Hancock as a volunteer coach, and ordered him to
> have
> no contact with any of the wrestling team and even banned him from setting
> foot upon the school.
>
> Fadlallah informed Marszalek that he was not to mention Hancock, his
> independent wrestling team and that "despite Hancock's son currently being
> an All State wrestler on Fordson's team, Hancock's existence was not to be
> acknowledged at wrestling meets." On top of all that, Fadlallah banned the
> entire Hancock family from helping at school concession stands.
>
> Although having coached in Dearborn for 35 years, an outstanding
> reputation
> with 450 wins and being a national hall of fame inductee in the sport,
> Marszalek was fired at the end of the 2008 school year. Fadlallah told
> the
> school's athletic director regarding Marszalek's renewal application,
> "Gone.
>
> I want him gone. No appeal." An assistant coach who had not applied for
> the
> position was given Marszalek's job.
>
> Dearborn is one of the most densely populated Muslim communities in the
> United States. Roughly 30,000 of the city's 98,000 residents are Muslim.
> The student population of Fordson High School is approximately 80 percent
> Arabic with many of them Muslims.
>
> Fordson had - and continues to have - a very public policy of allowing
> student athletes to recite Muslim prayers before, during, and after
> school-sanctioned athletic events. Despite his objections,
> sanctioning, and banning what he believes to be Christian religious
> activity, expression, and practice at non-school sponsored summer
> activities, Defendant Fadlallah promotes, sponsors, facilitates,
> and fosters Muslim religious activity, expression, and participation,
> including and prayer at school sanctioned events.
>
> Marszalek is not the first victim of Fadlallah, who has a history of
> working
>
> to eradicate Christianity from the school. The lawsuit concludes,
> "Fadlallah, since assuming duties as Fordson's principal in 2005, has
> systematically weeded out Christian teachers, coaches and employees and
> has
> terminated, demoted or reassigned them because of their Christian
> beliefs,"
> according to the suit. Fadlallah has publicly stated that he sees
> Dearborn Fordson High School as a Muslim school, both in students and
> faculty', and is working to that end.
>
> Where is the A.C.L.U. in this case?
>

YardleyLabs
01-15-2010, 03:03 PM
It should make for an interesting case.

As far as I can tell, the facts are:

1. Coach Marszalek was an at-will employee of the school. At the end of the 2007/2008 season, his contract was not renewed. Another teacher named Hargraves was offered the coaching position. Marszalek filed suit on July 29, 2009 for failing to give proper consideration to Marszalek's application to be appointed as coach for the subsequent school year.

2. The conflict between Marszalek and the Principal concerned the activities of Trey Hancock. Hancock had served as a volunteer assistant wrestling coach under Marszalek for five years. In addition, his son was a star member of the school team. As a private business, Hancock also ran a summer wrestling camp and encouraged members of the team to attend. Finally, Hancock was an evangelical religious minister. While he states that he never tried to preach to kids while in the school, he did as part of his outside training/coaching activities. Through this he was successful in converting some members of the team to his religion.

3. The Principal objected to what he believed was an inappropriate use of the school facilities to promote religion and ordered that Hancock be terminated from his volunteer position and that he be kept away from the team. He further directed that Hancock's wrestling program not be promoted or mentioned to students. Marszalek argued that he could not exclude Hancock from contact with the team since his son was a member of the team.

4. This dispute actually continued for a couple of years beginning in 2005 and culminating with the refusal to renew Marszalek's contract. Initially the Principal stated that he would not accept an application from Marszalek for the position for the 2008/09 school year but ultimately relented. However, he made it clear that he would not approve hiring Marszalek for the position and ultimately hired another teacher as wrestling coach.

From an employment law perspective, Marszalek would not normally have any basis for complaint since he was filling an at-will position and his contract had expired anyway. However, Marszalek alleges that he was actually fired because of his own Christian beliefs and because of the dispute over Hancock.

This is where it gets interesting. Hancock actually has no legal standing in the case since he never filled a formal position at all and was simply barred as a volunteer. Marszalek, in turn, never actually alleges any way in which the Principal appears to have discriminated against Marszalek based on Marszalek's own religious beliefs and it appears that his replacement was also a Christian (I do not know this for sure, but do not know many Muslims named Hargrave). Marszalek's own complaint makes it clear that he was directed to keep Hancock away from members of the team and that he did not do so. Marszalek argues that it would have been wrong to do so, but never indicates that he made any attempt to follow the direction he was given. Rather, it appears that he simply refused. Despite this, he was not terminated for insubordination. Rather, his contract was simply not renewed. There was no automatic renewal. According to Marszalek's complaint, the position required an annual application process and the final choice lay with the Principal.

In the employment law cases in which I have been involved (one based on discrimination, one based on violation of first amendment rights, and several other cases threatened), I've always been told that the grounds for suit by at-will employees are very narrow. In fact, a friend of mine caught his boss embezzling funds. As it turned out, the scheme actually went up the ranks including the President and the Chairman of the Board. It was a non-profit country club. When my friend presented his evidence of embezzlement to the President and the Chairman, he was immediately terminated and escorted out of the building. All of his research disappeared. He wanted to file suit for wrongful termination and was informed that he didn't have a case even if he could prove that he was fired for uncovering a crime since he was an at-will employee and they had the right to fire him no matter what.

The way the complaint is written makes me wonder if plaintiffs are actually interested in winning or if they are primarily interested in publicity. If I accept the facts as they are presented in the complaint, my own reaction is that both the coach and the Principal deserve to be fired. In terms of reactions on this forum, I wonder how UB and others would feel if the coach and assistant coach had been Muslims and that the conversions of the kids had been from Christianity to Islam.

For reference, the complaint is available at http://www.thomasmore.org/downloads/sb_thomasmore/FadlallahandDearbornSchoolsComplaint.pdf. Stories on this appear in many papers. I found the one in the Arab-American press interesting because it was much more balanced than I would have expected (See http://www.arabamericannews.com/news/index.php?mod=article&cat=Community&article=2375) (http://www.arabamericannews.com/news/index.php?mod=article&cat=Community&article=2375)

Charles C.
01-15-2010, 03:34 PM
If by "who and what JC (as you so irreverently refer to our Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ) is, has become..." you mean how He has been reduced to "just another prophet" by Muslims, Mormons, and most every other religion in the world then I agree.

Whoah, Bro! I haven't read the whole thread, and this may have been discussed, but you are either uninformed or have an axe to grind. Mormon's have not reduced Christ to just another prophet. We believe Christ is Lord and Savior of the world. Any assertion to the contrary is false.

Uncle Bill
01-15-2010, 04:58 PM
It should make for an interesting case.

As far as I can tell, the facts are:

1. Coach Marszalek was an at-will employee of the school. At the end of the 2007/2008 season, his contract was not renewed. Another teacher named Hargraves was offered the coaching position. Marszalek filed suit on July 29, 2009 for failing to give proper consideration to Marszalek's application to be appointed as coach for the subsequent school year.

2. The conflict between Marszalek and the Principal concerned the activities of Trey Hancock. Hancock had served as a volunteer assistant wrestling coach under Marszalek for five years. In addition, his son was a star member of the school team. As a private business, Hancock also ran a summer wrestling camp and encouraged members of the team to attend. Finally, Hancock was an evangelical religious minister. While he states that he never tried to preach to kids while in the school, he did as part of his outside training/coaching activities. Through this he was successful in converting some members of the team to his religion.

3. The Principal objected to what he believed was an inappropriate use of the school facilities to promote religion and ordered that Hancock be terminated from his volunteer position and that he be kept away from the team. He further directed that Hancock's wrestling program not be promoted or mentioned to students. Marszalek argued that he could not exclude Hancock from contact with the team since his son was a member of the team.

4. This dispute actually continued for a couple of years beginning in 2005 and culminating with the refusal to renew Marszalek's contract. Initially the Principal stated that he would not accept an application from Marszalek for the position for the 2008/09 school year but ultimately relented. However, he made it clear that he would not approve hiring Marszalek for the position and ultimately hired another teacher as wrestling coach.

From an employment law perspective, Marszalek would not normally have any basis for complaint since he was filling an at-will position and his contract had expired anyway. However, Marszalek alleges that he was actually fired because of his own Christian beliefs and because of the dispute over Hancock.

This is where it gets interesting. Hancock actually has no legal standing in the case since he never filled a formal position at all and was simply barred as a volunteer. Marszalek, in turn, never actually alleges any way in which the Principal appears to have discriminated against Marszalek based on Marszalek's own religious beliefs and it appears that his replacement was also a Christian (I do not know this for sure, but do not know many Muslims named Hargrave).

Wow, what a revelation! I never knew any Muslims named Lew Alcindor, or Cassius Clay either, but guess what????





Marszalek's own complaint makes it clear that he was directed to keep Hancock away from members of the team and that he did not do so. Marszalek argues that it would have been wrong to do so, but never indicates that he made any attempt to follow the direction he was given. Rather, it appears that he simply refused. Despite this, he was not terminated for insubordination. Rather, his contract was simply not renewed. There was no automatic renewal. According to Marszalek's complaint, the position required an annual application process and the final choice lay with the Principal.

In the employment law cases in which I have been involved (one based on discrimination, one based on violation of first amendment rights, and several other cases threatened), I've always been told that the grounds for suit by at-will employees are very narrow. In fact, a friend of mine caught his boss embezzling funds. As it turned out, the scheme actually went up the ranks including the President and the Chairman of the Board. It was a non-profit country club. When my friend presented his evidence of embezzlement to the President and the Chairman, he was immediately terminated and escorted out of the building. All of his research disappeared. He wanted to file suit for wrongful termination and was informed that he didn't have a case even if he could prove that he was fired for uncovering a crime since he was an at-will employee and they had the right to fire him no matter what.

The way the complaint is written makes me wonder if plaintiffs are actually interested in winning or if they are primarily interested in publicity. If I accept the facts as they are presented in the complaint, my own reaction is that both the coach and the Principal deserve to be fired. In terms of reactions on this forum, I wonder how UB and others would feel if the coach and assistant coach had been Muslims and that the conversions of the kids had been from Christianity to Islam.

I would have been furious. But then had I been living in an Islamic nation, I would have expected it, or anticipated my head being chopped off.

How unAmerican do you need to prove to us you are Yardley? We know you are an atheist, but lots of those non-believers still fight for this nation's Constitution. You just seem to fight against it whenever given the opportunity.

You might succeed in baffling the toadies on here with your claptrap, but please stop attempting to sway those of us that understand where you are coming from.



For reference, the complaint is available at http://www.thomasmore.org/downloads/sb_thomasmore/FadlallahandDearbornSchoolsComplaint.pdf. Stories on this appear in many papers. I found the one in the Arab-American press interesting because it was much more balanced than I would have expected (See http://www.arabamericannews.com/news/index.php?mod=article&cat=Community&article=2375)


Good...just what I live by, fair and balanced.

UB

K.Bullock
01-15-2010, 05:10 PM
It should make for an interesting case.

As far as I can tell, the facts are:

1. Coach Marszalek was an at-will employee of the school. At the end of the 2007/2008 season, his contract was not renewed. Another teacher named Hargraves was offered the coaching position. Marszalek filed suit on July 29, 2009 for failing to give proper consideration to Marszalek's application to be appointed as coach for the subsequent school year.

2. The conflict between Marszalek and the Principal concerned the activities of Trey Hancock. Hancock had served as a volunteer assistant wrestling coach under Marszalek for five years. In addition, his son was a star member of the school team. As a private business, Hancock also ran a summer wrestling camp and encouraged members of the team to attend. Finally, Hancock was an evangelical religious minister. While he states that he never tried to preach to kids while in the school, he did as part of his outside training/coaching activities. Through this he was successful in converting some members of the team to his religion.

3. The Principal objected to what he believed was an inappropriate use of the school facilities to promote religion and ordered that Hancock be terminated from his volunteer position and that he be kept away from the team. He further directed that Hancock's wrestling program not be promoted or mentioned to students. Marszalek argued that he could not exclude Hancock from contact with the team since his son was a member of the team.

4. This dispute actually continued for a couple of years beginning in 2005 and culminating with the refusal to renew Marszalek's contract. Initially the Principal stated that he would not accept an application from Marszalek for the position for the 2008/09 school year but ultimately relented. However, he made it clear that he would not approve hiring Marszalek for the position and ultimately hired another teacher as wrestling coach.

From an employment law perspective, Marszalek would not normally have any basis for complaint since he was filling an at-will position and his contract had expired anyway. However, Marszalek alleges that he was actually fired because of his own Christian beliefs and because of the dispute over Hancock.

This is where it gets interesting. Hancock actually has no legal standing in the case since he never filled a formal position at all and was simply barred as a volunteer. Marszalek, in turn, never actually alleges any way in which the Principal appears to have discriminated against Marszalek based on Marszalek's own religious beliefs and it appears that his replacement was also a Christian (I do not know this for sure, but do not know many Muslims named Hargrave). Marszalek's own complaint makes it clear that he was directed to keep Hancock away from members of the team and that he did not do so. Marszalek argues that it would have been wrong to do so, but never indicates that he made any attempt to follow the direction he was given. Rather, it appears that he simply refused. Despite this, he was not terminated for insubordination. Rather, his contract was simply not renewed. There was no automatic renewal. According to Marszalek's complaint, the position required an annual application process and the final choice lay with the Principal.

In the employment law cases in which I have been involved (one based on discrimination, one based on violation of first amendment rights, and several other cases threatened), I've always been told that the grounds for suit by at-will employees are very narrow. In fact, a friend of mine caught his boss embezzling funds. As it turned out, the scheme actually went up the ranks including the President and the Chairman of the Board. It was a non-profit country club. When my friend presented his evidence of embezzlement to the President and the Chairman, he was immediately terminated and escorted out of the building. All of his research disappeared. He wanted to file suit for wrongful termination and was informed that he didn't have a case even if he could prove that he was fired for uncovering a crime since he was an at-will employee and they had the right to fire him no matter what.

The way the complaint is written makes me wonder if plaintiffs are actually interested in winning or if they are primarily interested in publicity. If I accept the facts as they are presented in the complaint, my own reaction is that both the coach and the Principal deserve to be fired. In terms of reactions on this forum, I wonder how UB and others would feel if the coach and assistant coach had been Muslims and that the conversions of the kids had been from Christianity to Islam.

For reference, the complaint is available at http://www.thomasmore.org/downloads/sb_thomasmore/FadlallahandDearbornSchoolsComplaint.pdf. Stories on this appear in many papers. I found the one in the Arab-American press interesting because it was much more balanced than I would have expected (See http://www.arabamericannews.com/news/index.php?mod=article&cat=Community&article=2375) (http://www.arabamericannews.com/news/index.php?mod=article&cat=Community&article=2375)

That's interesting and probably how it will go down. Why do you think Hargrave is a Christian name? I know Christians with surnames that originate from all corners of the globe. Christianity is not hereditary.


I would imagine if the coach was of the atheist or muslim religions the court of public opinion would be in session and the principal would be fired for "pushing" his religion.

YardleyLabs
01-15-2010, 05:31 PM
I would have been furious. But then had I been living in an Islamic nation, I would have expected it, or anticipated my head being chopped off.

How unAmerican do you need to prove to us you are Yardley? We know you are an atheist, but lots of those non-believers still fight for this nation's Constitution. You just seem to fight against it whenever given the opportunity.

You might succeed in baffling the toadies on here with your claptrap, but please stop attempting to sway those of us that understand where you are coming from.
Good...just what I live by, fair and balanced.

UB

So, if I understand you, it is OK for a Christian assistant coach to use his position to convert Muslims to Christianity but you would be furious if the same were done by a Muslim assistant coach to Christians? I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but that is how I am reading your retort.

Even in your original post the complaint is made about students praying to Allah before and after sporting events, and you wonder where the ACLU is. The ACLU fought that battle many times and lost -- typically because of Christian prayers initiated by students before and after sporting events. The courts ruled that these were legal as long as they were initiated by students and the school was not involved. It just so happens that in the Dearborn school, 80% of the students are Muslim.

Personally, I think the courts were wrong whether the prayers are Muslim or Christian. You appear to believe they are only wrong if the prayers are Muslim. That, in my opinion, is anti-American. You persist in calling me "unAmerican" and claiming that I hate my country. I do not hate my country. I do not hate my forefather's country and they were among those that helped create America. However, I would most certainly hate the country you seem determined to create, a misanthropic, small minded place with freedom limited to those that you approve. Fortunately, the US Constitution, which I do fight for, applies equally to all of us, and not just when it's convenient.

K.Bullock
01-15-2010, 09:29 PM
So, if I understand you, it is OK for a Christian assistant coach to use his position to convert Muslims to Christianity but you would be furious if the same were done by a Muslim assistant coach to Christians? I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but that is how I am reading your retort.

Even in your original post the complaint is made about students praying to Allah before and after sporting events, and you wonder where the ACLU is. The ACLU fought that battle many times and lost -- typically because of Christian prayers initiated by students before and after sporting events. The courts ruled that these were legal as long as they were initiated by students and the school was not involved. It just so happens that in the Dearborn school, 80% of the students are Muslim.

Personally, I think the courts were wrong whether the prayers are Muslim or Christian. You appear to believe they are only wrong if the prayers are Muslim. That, in my opinion, is anti-American. You persist in calling me "unAmerican" and claiming that I hate my country. I do not hate my country. I do not hate my forefather's country and they were among those that helped create America. However, I would most certainly hate the country you seem determined to create, a misanthropic, small minded place with freedom limited to those that you approve. Fortunately, the US Constitution, which I do fight for, applies equally to all of us, and not just when it's convenient.

Hmm small minded, limited freedom, sure. Stop and think, where is this happening? Where else on earth can the enemies of a nation openly preach against it on it's own soil? Where on earth can heretics by the standard of the majority religion practice their rituals in peace? Where can the sexually immoral by the standards of the religious majority practice their immorality but be protected from harm while doing it?

Here try this, lead a gay pride march in the former soviet union or just pick a country in the middle east. Go to China and scream at the top of your lungs in Tienanmen square about the REAL discrimination,slavery and human rights abuses going on there. Your a man of means go do it. I know Christian missionaries that are doing it and dieing for it. Where are the atheists and the liberal heroes of the people?

If I were a thinking liberal atheist I would pray America does not lose it's Christian religion.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/16/world/asia/16china.html?ref=world

http://www.christianpost.com/article/20100114/over-100-christian-teens-arrested-in-egypt/

http://www.latimes.com/who-story-legislative-prayer-011110,0,546205.story

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=121865

YardleyLabs
01-16-2010, 07:19 AM
Hmm small minded, limited freedom, sure. Stop and think, where is this happening? Where else on earth can the enemies of a nation openly preach against it on it's own soil? Where on earth can heretics by the standard of the majority religion practice their rituals in peace? Where can the sexually immoral by the standards of the religious majority practice their immorality but be protected from harm while doing it?

Here try this, lead a gay pride march in the former soviet union or just pick a country in the middle east. Go to China and scream at the top of your lungs in Tienanmen square about the REAL discrimination,slavery and human rights abuses going on there. Your a man of means go do it. I know Christian missionaries that are doing it and dieing for it. Where are the atheists and the liberal heroes of the people?

If I were a thinking liberal atheist I would pray America does not lose it's Christian religion.
......

The things you list are very much the reasons I love being an American. The quickest way I can think that we might lose those freedoms is by becoming a Christian nation instead of a nation of laws. The last thing the world needs is another theocracy. Of course, I suspect that if you were a "thinking liberal atheist", you might not pray for anything.;-)

K.Bullock
01-16-2010, 09:17 AM
The things you list are very much the reasons I love being an American. The quickest way I can think that we might lose those freedoms is by becoming a Christian nation instead of a nation of laws. The last thing the world needs is another theocracy. Of course, I suspect that if you were a "thinking liberal atheist", you might not pray for anything.;-)


This environment in America exists because America is a Christian nation, even if not directly practicing Christians, our values and laws are heavily influenced by Christianity.

Does secular humanism value anything that I mentioned; freedom,equality,mercy, justice? No, secular humanism gives us theories such as survival of the fittest, natural selection which are diametrically opposed to values that protect the weaker or fringe elements of society.

What is the root of your own "liberal" ideas of justice and equality. I would contend it is exposure to Christian culture and values.

LOL! I think atheists think more about God than your average guy on the street, that's a form of prayer. We call it meditating ;)

Evan
01-16-2010, 09:52 AM
How did this perception get so skewed? :confused: Being a "Christian nation" does not mean the USA a theocracy. What on earth sent you off in that direction? It just means we're a nation of people guided by values largely derived from our dominant faith in Christ.

Has it ever come to your attention that there are over 2000 Christian denominations worldwide? It's not a club. It's not a country. It's a belief system, and we don't all have to swear an oath to a single set of doctrinal tenets to be Christian. Neither do we have to insist that our government be led by people wearing badges saying "Christian". What is all this?

Evan

dnf777
01-16-2010, 10:49 AM
How did this perception get so skewed? :confused: Being a "Christian nation" does not mean the USA a theocracy. What on earth sent you off in that direction? It just means we're a nation of people guided by values largely derived from our dominant faith in Christ.

Has it ever come to your attention that there are over 2000 Christian denominations worldwide? It's not a club. It's not a country. It's a belief system, and we don't all have to swear an oath to a single set of doctrinal tenets to be Christian. Neither do we have to insist that our government be led by people wearing badges saying "Christian". What is all this?

Evan

Good point Evan. I think some problems arise when people feel that Christians claim exclusive rights to the values put forth. Almost all the world's religions have very similar teachings when it comes to the golden rule, charity, and family. They also have many stories and allegories that do not fit in modern society, and are largely regarded historically only, like much of our Old Testament.

YardleyLabs
01-16-2010, 11:48 AM
How did this perception get so skewed? :confused: Being a "Christian nation" does not mean the USA a theocracy. What on earth sent you off in that direction? It just means we're a nation of people guided by values largely derived from our dominant faith in Christ.

Has it ever come to your attention that there are over 2000 Christian denominations worldwide? It's not a club. It's not a country. It's a belief system, and we don't all have to swear an oath to a single set of doctrinal tenets to be Christian. Neither do we have to insist that our government be led by people wearing badges saying "Christian". What is all this?

Evan
I see a huge difference between being a nation where the majority of the population is Christian but that atheists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims, etc., are all welcome and being a nation that defines itself as Christian. In my mind we are the former, but not the latter. The minute you define yourself as a Christian nation than, by extension, you are saying that the non-religious and the religious that are from non-Christian backgrounds are "tolerated" which is far different from being accepted as equal.

I think UB's comments regarding his willingness to accept a Christian coach converting Muslims the Christianity while stating that he would be angered if a Muslim coach converted Christians to Islam is a clear example of that difference. I suspect that much of the reaction to events in Dearborn is a reaction to the unusual situation of having a school where Christians are the minority and Muslims are the large majority.

As a non-Christian attending public schools in an overwhelmingly Christian area, I know exactly what the feels like and it sucks. Those who are of the dominant persuasion -- whether that be religious, linguistic, political, etc. -- seldom focus on the many different ways that their values are imposed on others. That is what makes it such a shock when times change and the majority becomes the minority in a particular environment.

Evan
01-16-2010, 11:54 AM
I see a huge difference between being a nation where the majority of the population is Christian but that atheists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims, etc., are all welcome and being a nation that defines itself as Christian. In my mind we are the former, but not the latter. The minute you define yourself as a Christian nation than, by extension, you are saying that the non-religious and the religious that are from non-Christian backgrounds are "tolerated" which is far different from being accepted as equal.Who said that? I'm really sorry to hear that you see our country through that horribly narrow lens.

Evan

YardleyLabs
01-16-2010, 12:03 PM
Who said that? I'm really sorry to hear that you see our country through that horribly narrow lens.

Evan
Evan,

I don't think I understand what you are reacting to. Can you clarify?

The intention of my statement was that I see America as a nation that has a majority Christian population but is not defined by the religious beliefs of the population and is welcoming to all. That in my opinion is a good thing. By contrast, I am saying that a nation that defines itself as Christian is, by implication saying that there is a preferred belief system even if other belief systems are tolerated. That in my opinion would be a bad thing. As I see it, we tolerate all religions and prefer none. I interpret that as the meaning of the First Amendment.

Are we misunderstanding each other, or are you saying that my desire (which I believe ws shared by our forefathers) to have a country that treats all religions and non-religions with the same tolerance is somehow narrow minded?

Evan
01-16-2010, 12:17 PM
Evan,

I don't think I understand what you are reacting to. Can you clarify?

The intention of my statement was that I see America as a nation that has a majority Christian population but is not defined by the religious beliefs of the population and is welcoming to all. That in my opinion is a good thing. By contrast, I am saying that a nation that defines itself as Christian is, by implication saying that there is a preferred belief system even if other belief systems are tolerated.That's what I'm reacting to. Where is it written that this is so? My wife and I are devoted Christians, but embrace friends and neighbors of all faiths. We celebrated Hanukkah with our grandchildren this year - not because we're converting to Judahism, but to broaden our grandkid's understanding of, and friendship towards the Jewish people. We played traditional games, ate a traditional meal, etc. It was a simple way to give them an education, while setting the example we believe should typify our behavior according to our beliefs. They are now positioned to stand up against some of the populist negativism toward Jews. That is what I believe Christians do.

This notion that because we are a Christian nation, which we've always been, makes us intollerant of others has no basis in fact as a society. I only think it states fact, and provides an expectation of such a nation as operating by a strong and consistent value system that supports its laws and embraces all people.
That in my opinion would be a bad thing. As I see it, we tolerate all religions and prefer none. I interpret that as the meaning of the First Amendment.

Are we misunderstanding each other, or are you saying that my desire (which I believe ws shared by our forefathers) to have a country that treats all religions and non-religions with the same tolerance is somehow narrow minded?What you've stated as your position is what you previously appeared to define as America-past. My view is that is America present, but for some vocal exceptions.

Evan

YardleyLabs
01-16-2010, 12:29 PM
That's what I'm reacting to. Where is it written that this is so? My wife and I are devoted Christians, but embrace friends and neighbors of all faiths. We celebrated Hanukkah with our grandchildren this year - not because we're converting to Judahism, but to broaden our grandkid's understanding of, and friendship towards the Jewish people. We played traditional games, ate a traditional meal, etc. It was a simple way to give them an education, while setting the example we believe should typify our behavior according to our beliefs. They are now positioned to stand up against some of the populist negativism toward Jews. That is what I believe Christians do.

This notion that because we are a Christian nation, which we've always been, makes us intollerant of others has no basis in fact as a society. I only think it states fact, and provides an expectation of such a nation as operating by a strong and consistent value system that supports its laws and embraces all people.What you've stated as your position is what you previously appeared to define as America-past. My view is that is America present, but for some vocal exceptions.

Evan
What do you mean in defining America as a Christian nation? How is that different from saying we are a nation that is not defined by religion but where the majority of the population is Christian? I did not say we were an intolerant nation. However, it seems to me that when names become important, it is for a reason.

Evan
01-16-2010, 12:59 PM
What do you mean in defining America as a Christian nation? How is that different from saying we are a nation that is not defined by religion but where the majority of the population is Christian? I did not say we were an intolerant nation. However, it seems to me that when names become important, it is for a reason.Jeff,

I suppose we may be closer together than words are making it appear. I'm only going by something you wrote twice, unless I am misunderstanding you.

"I see a huge difference between being a nation where the majority of the population is Christian but that atheists, agnostics, Jews, Muslims, etc., are all welcome and being a nation that defines itself as Christian. In my mind we are the former, but not the latter."

"I am saying that a nation that defines itself as Christian is, by implication saying that there is a preferred belief system even if other belief systems are tolerated."

I'm saddened by your personal experience. But I don't think that equates as an accurate picture of America at large. I see America as a nation that is both "the former" and "the latter", inasmuch as the Christian influence is not a matter of cultural intollerance, but the reverse. It is a demographic of radically religious intolerance who attacked this nation, and in so doing imposed restrictions on what has always been an open door policy toward the world. It would still be so, but for that.

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Such is the time honored greeting to the world from a nation overwhelmingly Christian, and defined by a set of values. We do not, nor have we ever, made christianity a requirement of citizenship. Not now. Not ever. But we offer our uniqueness as a compassionate and tolerant nation as a logical result of the fact that we remain a Christian nation.

Evan

Uncle Bill
01-16-2010, 03:46 PM
It's all so clear in beautiful downtown Yardley, PA. It's my bet that this would be quickly disavowed in a foxhole.

"Of course, I suspect that if you were a "thinking liberal atheist", you might not pray for anything.:wink:
__________________


But then, why would you ever get into a foxhole? Conscientious objectors are anathema to that form of Americanism.

With your PC mind and broad brush, you have attempted to goad me into bigotry. But if you can't understand my post, why should I attempt to explain it any further for you...you will believe what you want to. Sobeit!

UB

YardleyLabs
01-16-2010, 05:32 PM
It's all so clear in beautiful downtown Yardley, PA. It's my bet that this would be quickly disavowed in a foxhole.

"Of course, I suspect that if you were a "thinking liberal atheist", you might not pray for anything.:wink:
__________________


But then, why would you ever get into a foxhole? Conscientious objectors are anathema to that form of Americanism.

With your PC mind and broad brush, you have attempted to goad me into bigotry. But if you can't understand my post, why should I attempt to explain it any further for you...you will believe what you want to. Sobeit!

UB
Yes UB, I have been in life threatening situations: life threatening to me and life threatening to those I love. No, UB, those situations did not drive me out of my comfortable atheism into a transactional relationship with some deity -- save me, save my loved one, and I will believe. The reality is that I was an atheist when I was five, an atheist when I was 15, an atheist when I was 20, and I am an atheist at the age of 60+. I have held family members in my arms as they died and remained an atheist. While it seems to be a bg deal for you, it is not one for me.

I don't spend time thinking how can I disbelieve in God today, nor have I ever felt any need to try to convince anyone else that there isn't a God. To be blunt, I figure if a god exists that he, she or it doesn't need my faith to know it. Similarly I believe that the faith that you or anyone else has in God does not depend on my beliefs or even on whether or not a god actually exists. Your belief is enough, or should be, for you, just as my beliefs are enough for me.

I have also, for what it's worth, never been or pretended to be a pacifist or conscientious objector. I opposed the war in Vietnam and the second Iraq war. Both were launched without sufficient justification and defined by stupidity in our leadership. I have tremendous respect for those who did their duty in those wars, but not those who sent them there.

I have certainly not "attempted to goad [you] into bigotry." You choose what you want to post on your own.

Pete
01-17-2010, 11:08 AM
we need to be tolerant of any one or any religion that embraces out constitution,,,, how ever we do not need to be tolerant of any one who wants to destroy it or abuse it. And that includes "christions"

Pete

YardleyLabs
01-17-2010, 11:14 AM
we need to be tolerant of any one or any religion that embraces out constitution,,,, how ever we do not need to be tolerant of any one who wants to destroy it or abuse it. And that includes "christions"

Pete
On that we can agree. I've never seen a reason to tolerate intolerance.:(

K.Bullock
01-17-2010, 11:23 AM
On that we can agree. I've never seen a reason to tolerate intolerance.:(
That makes you ..Intolerant!




j/k ...up late last night and too early today.:D

YardleyLabs
01-17-2010, 11:41 AM
That makes you ..Intolerant!




j/k ...up late last night and too early today.:D
Ahh yes. The irony. Let my epitaph read:

"Here lies Jeff Goodwin, known for his relentless rejection of intolerance."

:rolleyes::rolleyes: Translation: Here is an intolerant liar. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

K.Bullock
01-19-2010, 12:14 AM
Ahh yes. The irony. Let my epitaph read:

"Here lies Jeff Goodwin, known for his relentless rejection of intolerance."

:rolleyes::rolleyes: Translation: Here is an intolerant liar. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Or an "Itinerant intolerant, intolerant of intolerance."

OK I'm done now, good night.