Woman beheaded in London

What planet are you on? It's been constantly in the news for years, the pope himself has apologised!

He apologised because the child molesters were his subordinates and the discussions focused on individual priests or the Catholic Church as an institution where as this does not happen in the case of Muslims. Instead of focusing on the particularities of each case (mental patient this time, it seems) or the dangerous ideology which is followed by a small minority of Muslims (IS), the criticism is focused on Islam as a whole and all of its followers.
 
He apologised because the child molesters were his subordinates and the discussions focused on individual priests or the Catholic Church as an institution where as this does not happen in the case of Muslims. Instead of focusing on the particularities of each case (mental patient this time, it seems) or the dangerous ideology which is followed by a small minority of Muslims (IS), the criticism is focused on Islam as a whole and all of its followers.

That's not what you said though. You said nobody mentioned the Catholic problem. You are wrong. It has and is mentioned. A lot. Also with catholicism it's an institutional problem not a dogmatic one. It is restricted to the clergy. With islam the problem is the followers, preachers and possibly even the faith itself.
 
That's not what you said though. You said nobody mentioned the Catholic problem. You are wrong. It has and is mentioned. A lot. Also with catholicism it's an institutional problem not a dogmatic one. It is restricted to the clergy. With islam the problem is the followers, preachers and possibly even the faith itself.

When I used the term "Catholic problem", i meant that it isn't a problem in the same way there is a "Muslim problem", which according to you, refers to the followers, preachers and possibly the faith itself. You put all Muslims in the same basket as a small number fundamentalists (relatively to the total number of Muslims) but the large majority of Muslims go about their daily lives and avoid bothering anyone, even in worn torn countries such as Iraq.

The problem is in your head, not in this religion or its preachers or its followers.
 
When I used the term "Catholic problem", i meant that it isn't a problem in the same way there is a "Muslim problem", which according to you, refers to the followers, preachers and possibly the faith itself. You put all Muslims in the same basket as a small number fundamentalists (relatively to the total number of Muslims) but the large majority of Muslims go about their daily lives and avoid bothering anyone, even in worn torn countries such as Iraq.

The problem is in your head, not in this religion or its preachers or its followers.

If the problem is in my head how do we have hundreds of thousands of its followers acting like complete barbarians using it to justify their actions all over the globe?

How do we have preachers who have been kicked out of this country for the twisted version they preach and the hatred they incite?

Why do we have a book with quotes inciting its followers to hatred? A prophet who himself was a man of war - not peace. He was a great warrior.

There therefore clearly is a problem even if it's restricted to a small %age of Muslims.
 

Well I guessing we are both very different people. I am also guessing we are both glad of that.

I don't think Islam is a positive thing, I think it has onerous aspects and I think the world would be better without its like. However, I do believe and would fight for peoples rights to practice it whilst it doesn't stray over certain barriers. In this country it never really does - in other countries it definitely does.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Islam is a positive thing, I think it has onerous aspects and I think the world would be better without its like. However, I do believe and would fight for peoples rights to practice it whilst it doesn't stray over certain barriers. In this country it never really does - in other countries it definitely does.

That's something I entirely agree with.

However what I find tragic is in the past it was a faith of progress and enlightenment. Great feats of art, science and medicine were accomplished in its name.
 
That's something I entirely agree with.

However what I find tragic is in the past it was a faith of progress and enlightenment. Great feats of art, science and medicine were accomplished in its name.

Haha I am glad you raised that! What we are allowed and not allowed to say:

Islam has influenced great feats of art.
Islam has influenced great feats of science.
Islam has influenced great feats of medicine.
Islam Culture has encouraged the repression of women.
Islam Culture has encouraged terrorism.
etc
 
That's something I entirely agree with.

However what I find tragic is in the past it was a faith of progress and enlightenment. Great feats of art, science and medicine were accomplished in its name.

Yes all that knowledge plundered from the leftovers of a Greek Hellenized Egypt and Middle East. Yes they just pulled Astronomy and maths from thier backsides. Remember the claims about Islam being one of the first to realise the earth was not flat?


Aristotle got there hundreds of years before them and the knowledge was sort of lost. What they did was learn from it and translate it from Greek to Arabic and then it would go from Arabic to Latin to give rise to the age of enlightenment in Europe? Thanks for giving us back some of our old lost knowledge and claiming it as being the golden age of Islam.


Which bugs me also this Golden age based in Spain, People do realise all they did was administer right? The Jewish population that knew how the old Spain worked simply stayed on in the same job for thier new masters. Hence why both faiths got thrown out of Spain forever by the Crusaders. I am sure there did something good with everything they learned. But to hang on to it as the one shining light of thier civilization is beyond pathetic.
 
Last edited:
Well I guessing we are both very different people. I am also guessing we are both glad of that.

True, I do like to treat people equally and fairly regardless of who they are.

I don't think Islam is a positive thing, I think it has onerous aspects and I think the world would be better without its like. However, I do believe and would fight for peoples rights to practice it whilst it doesn't stray over certain barriers. In this country it never really does - in other countries it definitely does.

Thanks for letting me know where you stand I guess.
 
If that means there is "Muslim problem", I believe there is an even bigger one - the "Catholic problem" - yet, for some reason, I don't see a lot of people complaining about those evil Catholics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholic_sex_abuse_cases_by_country

Yeah but catholics ain't going around cutting peoples head off and screaming God is Great when slaying and raping nor are they on a warpath. That sort of stuff has been put to history. :D

Why do we have a book with quotes inciting its followers to hatred? A prophet who himself was a man of war - not peace. He was a great warrior.

He was a pedo too. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Making compromises can lead down a slippery slope...

But to treat people equally does not mean to treat everyone the same it means some people have to have special allowances made for them to have that equal treatment. Therefore, you do make compromises.

For example, a family straight into this country from Pakistan dad works long hours and mum stays at home with a new child. If only dad can speak English and mum can't then we need to make a compromise and the health visitor would have to give the mum information in a language she can understand so she can access services for her child. That is a reasonable compromise to ensure that woman and their baby can access the same services that a native speaker can.
 
But to treat people equally does not mean to treat everyone the same it means some people have to have special allowances made for them to have that equal treatment. Therefore, you do make compromises.

For example, a family straight into this country from Pakistan dad works long hours and mum stays at home with a new child. If only dad can speak English and mum can't then we need to make a compromise and the health visitor would have to give the mum information in a language she can understand so she can access services for her child. That is a reasonable compromise to ensure that woman and their baby can access the same services that a native speaker can.

The above isn't really a comprise, you would offer the same service to anyone who couldn't speak English or couldn't speak at all.

I'm not sure that's the same as "treat people equally and fairly" though, to which you quoted.
 
The above isn't really a comprise, you would offer the same service to anyone who couldn't speak English or couldn't speak at all.

I'm not sure that's the same as "treat people equally and fairly" though, to which you quoted.

Would you prefer it if I used the word allowance then?
 
Well its a service, like I said, again not sure what it has to do with what I said "treat people equally and fairly"

Because as that example shows if you want to treat everyone equally you don't necessarily treat them the same - you have to make allowances for their individual circumstances.
 
Because as that example shows if you want to treat everyone equally you don't necessarily treat them the same - you have to make allowances for their individual circumstances.

Not really, you treat them the same. If person A is fully abled, he is offered a service (no wheel chair). If person A is disabled he is offered a Service (wheel chair). Regardless of who the person is, the same person is treated the same if he was in either scenario.

Indeed the safest road to Hell is the gradual one--the gentle slope, soft underfoot, without sudden turnings, without milestones, without signposts,...Your affectionate uncle, Screwtape
C.S. Lewis
 
Back
Top Bottom