First, Christian practice is based more on Paul's teachings than Jesus's. The holy days focus on Jesus but the teachings and practices in the church focus on Paul. Of course, given the wide variety of Christian traditions, this is a general statement and specific exceptions can be found. However, when needed, many Christians happily appeal to the Old Testament as well. So the distinction between Jesus and Mohammed is not accurate, given the Bible has many authors, none of whom were Jesus. Second, Christianity and Islam are arguably both harmful. In my opinion they have historically been harmful in similar ways but currently in different ways in Western society (the views about Islam today applies to Christianity yesterday, but Christianity has a roughly 500 year head start). Third, today, in America, the "average" conservative Christian desires and seeks to oppress and persecute people through government agencies, while a very small minority of fundamentalist Muslims desires and seeks to cause bloodshed. Now, this may shock you, but a very small minority of fundamentalist Christians advocates, because of their religious texts, that certain people they don't approve of should also be killed - and if you read gay newspapers you will see they sometimes succeed (gay bashings are much less likely to make the news in America than you would think, so you have to turn to gay newspapers). In other words, the difference between the very small minority of fundamentalist Christians and the very small minority of fundamentalist Muslims is that one targets specific people in Western society that you are likely not part of, while the other targets a more general audience that you are part of. And, in my opinion, that is why you see one as more threatening that the other, whereas I see both as equally threatening. Personally, I am much more likely to be killed by a fundamentalist Christian than by a fundamentalist Muslim, at least based on the 5 death threats I have received over the years from Christians and 0 from Muslims.
And people use Christianity in the west to compare to Islam in the middle east. Shit Christianity in Africa is probably 50-100 years behind European Christianity, Christianity in Latin America is probably 10-20 years behind. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Africa To be fair to it is not only religions that are unfair (they are a tool/excuse after all), Officially atheist states like Russia and China do not have a great record with gay rights, Japan/Korea are 2 very secular countries and their culture is not that supportive of gay rights. So it is we the people that are fvcked up and religion is used as an excuse for out fvcked up mentality.
These questions are country-dependent. In the U.S., angry Christians are probably the greater danger than radical Muslims. In the Middle East, on the other hand, the Muslims have been doing some serious Christian hounding (and killing), and have a lot to answer for.
Let's just say there is no way in hell I'd visit Uganda right now as a gay man (and Jamaica isn't the safest place either for me).
Besides all the gay stuff...the hungry children, stifling temperatures and soldiers walking around with AK-47s does nothing for ya?
The beef I have with Fundamentalist Christians is that while they encounter a genuine scumbag, a truly horrible person like, I dunno, John Gotti, Bernie Madoff or Donald Trump, they'll look the other way, clutch their pearls and tisk-tisk it and say "I don't approve of their behaviour, but who am I to judge? Let the Lord deal with those people on Judgment Day." And yet, they won't take the same approach to gay people who are just living their lives. It's fine if you say you "don't approve of their lifestyle," but why can't you just leave them alone, and if the Lord decides to punish them, so be it. Leave it up to Him. Regarding the whole Islam vs. Christianity thing, I found that Dutch viedo where they took a Bible, made it look like a Quaran and started quoting passages. People were saying how wrong and barbaric it was, and then they took the cover off. For some reason, I thought "Vaat de Foeck" was the left back for AZ Alkmaar's reserve team, but you learn something new every day! Here's the full video: And he're another one with commentary on the same video:
This fine Christian wants to execute [brown] people without due process: http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2...gins-suspected-islamic-radicals-kill-them-all The free world…all of Christendom…is at war with Islamic horror. Not one penny of American treasure should be granted to any nation who harbors these heathen animals. Not a single radicalized Islamic suspect should be granted any measure of quarter. Their intended entry to the American homeland should be summarily denied. Every conceivable measure should be engaged to hunt them down. Hunt them, identity them, and kill them. Kill them all. For the sake of all that is good and righteous. Kill them all. /quote He sounds a lot like some other Christians in this thread... clearly an enlightened member of XXI century christendom! Did I mention Higgins has been married four times and has been sued for child support? And he supports banning abortions, gay conversion therapy, fetal personhood and all those kind of things... He also voted to take healthcare away from millions of people... http://action.secular.org/app/person/682824?0
Mofo needs to read him some Kierkegaard to learn the distinction between "Christianity" and "Christendom."
Seeing as you are someone who hasn't made a single argument in this thread I can say that your opinion is 100% irrelevant.
That's an incredibly problematic statement, even if you don't buy the thesis of this book. https://www.amazon.com/St-Paul-Apos...id=1496687283&sr=8-3&keywords=karen+armstrong You really, really are asserting many things in this thread that are up for argument. One of the reasons this argument seems fine on the surface is that it relies on telescoping history on the one hand (compare the Crusades to the contemporary Genghis Khan, or compare Muhammad to his non-Muslim neighbors in Arabia, and then tell me how awful religion is...instead you compare the Crusades to modern European post-Christian nations) and ignoring history on the other (whycome Oliver Cromwell counts, but Hitler and Stalin don't? It's almost as if your side throws out any evidence that undermines your thesis.) (Seriously, you can say all you want to about religion, but ain't no way we're catching up to the mid-20th century's Terror Twins on the Scoreboard of Death.)
The funny thing to me is, how some Americans, living in one of the most liberal and free, and rich societies on the planet (if not the most free), complain that some marginalized KKK, or mysterious "bigot Christian" wants to persecute gay/black/women (whoever) and punish them without trial, yet they are ready to support Islamic countries which do that on daily bases as per their ideology/religion... I don't get it... Also, how much support from current "liberal left" does actual Communism have in America. Very surprised, why would they do it? If America is soooo bad, you can move to the countries you love so much, and preach your ideologies there. You can attempt to preach gay and women rights in Saudi Arabia or Iran (your choice), or Sudan, you can try preaching free speech in North Korea or Wenezuela. It seems America and "bigot Christians" are so bad, that it would be way safer for you to move somewhere else, since they are so peaceful and democratic outside of America, and America with its principles is all sort of evil. This is my real impression, what is wrong with you? You have so much free speech, gay rights, liberty, money that you really lost it. It is also beyond me, how someone who portrays themselves as an Atheist, or Feminist, Gay rights advocate, or Libertarian would ally themselves with religion which restricts all of the above, and in addition burn American flag, wave Soviet flag, and demand more "liberty" at the same time. I know, in Poland we are pretty stupid, so please explain...
It is not an uniform society. Some parts of it are very liberal and allow people to be whatever they want. Other factions want to take us back to the 1600s. The party in power right now is bent backwards on accomplishing that. Many are known bigots and have links to woeful associations and people. And that is without even talking about income inequality.
Yes, I understand - but it is exactly what you say - it is NOT UNIFORM SOCIETY which makes you free, and what you are... You are free to be different as long as you do not harm anyone else, or do not impede their rights. We have already seen what can happen in societies which strive to be non-uniform under the guidance of the state (USSR, III Reich). Saying that Trump wants to take you back to 1600's is not true - how does he want to do it? I would rather look at Europe, where there are real forces striving to take it back to 600's, and these are alive and well. Income inequality? Really? Well, they have equality in Cuba or N. Korea, or USSR... In US if you want to get income, you are free to try, just pick your area of specialization. Where you think you going to get "income" if you can't get it in America - in Yemen? Sweden?
I haven't read Karen Armstrong on Paul, but this book is probably quite apt for this thread..since your last couple of sentences could be a reference to it... https://www.amazon.com/Fields-Blood...rd_wg=ecMax&psc=1&refRID=1K4K3PS2BPZP14EN2JES
Most Muslims I know support gay marriage and are feminists. Now I hang out with a pretty liberal bunch, but there you are.
Agreed. And obviously, there is no in-between from uniform and dictatorial to unrestrictedly open. - No religious freedom. - Coal as the main source of energy. - Women's submission to men - No or little international trade - Racial discrimination - No gay rights - No abortions or contraception - No inheritance taxes Isn't all that medievalist? In practical terms there's not much difference between the 600s and the 1600s, yet a lot between the XVII century and the XXI century. Probably we have a better chance here Than in Yemen but a lot worse than in Sweden. We are a society where your income is increasingly linked to your parents economic success. And that's not desirable.
Are these "Floridian" Muslims? How does their feminism manifest? I am curious to hear this: 1. Would they allow their daughter to live alone in her own apartment? 2. Would they allow their daughter to live with a man without marriage in her apartment? 3. Would they allow their daughter to go out with a Christian or a Jew? 4. Would they allow their daughter to be in a sexual relationship with another woman? 5. What would they do if she decided to become an Atheist, or Buddhist? 6. Would they allow their daughter to wear what she wants, and what if she wants a bikini (if it is in Florida, may come useful)? Most importantly, if their daughter decided to do any of the above, what would they do? Yes, I know there are Christians who would shiver at the above, yet what you think these "bigots" would do if their daughter did any of the above? Question to Umar: how would you as a "mainstream" Muslim person react to the above? How do you think other "mainstream" Muslims would react?
Is Trump a Protestant? So, I assume he intends to put Protestantism (Lutheranism/Presbyterianism/Anglican whatever he is) as the official state religion of the USA. Subdue all other religions by force, only Protestants can be professionals and hold any office. Gays, witches, feminists shall be burned, drowned, hanged; Catholics - convert, or out to Canada, Muslims - convert, or out to Canada, Blacks - back to plantations. That would be 1600's all right... What did he do or is currently doing to bring USA to the above standards? What is he doing in general to restrict other people's freedoms? What can he do to bring US to level of Saudi Arabia for example? Coal and taxes is a different discussion. Sweden is ultra socialist country - if you want to be like them, you can try by confiscating all money from your upper class (esp. Hollywood - I wonder how would they react, hehehehe - really would have to move to Canada I guess). Or even you could move there, they will gladly take you in and pay for everything... with other people's taxes. The question is, when will they run out of somebody else's cash.
Well, given how diverse Christianity and Christian beliefs and doctrines are, I'm not surprised it would be an incredibly problematic statement. Regardless, from my personal experiences in over 20 years in Evangelical Christianity, the teachings of Paul are a major point of focus. For one example, when discussing the "gay issue", immediately people go to comments by Paul, not Jesus. Ironically, I wasn't even thinking about the Crusades. When I talk about the 500 year head start and then look at Islam today, I compare it to Christianity in the 1500s - more the age of exploration and Inquisitions than the age of the Crusades. And if you aren't aware of the Christian history during the age of exploration and colonialism, and how LGBT in particular were treated in Europe and elsewhere at that time, you should review your history. Granted, the history as pertaining to LGBT is difficult to find but suffice it to say it involves a lot of Christians systematically murdering a lot of LGBT in the name of Jesus.
I, for one, am not "supporting Islamic countries", I am supporting Muslim individuals and saying they should not be discriminated against in my country because of their religion. I don't know why that is so difficult to understand.