Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,053
Don't be intolerant mate.
Paedophile gang not dealt with by both the Police and social services.
- Thread starter BowdonUK
- Start date
Is this still about mostly Pakistani grooming gangs who typically aren't refugees?
Caporegime
It's creeping up in Syrian, Afghan and iraqi groups too. My parents home town took in a lot of Syrians and issues are arising there with young syrian men and teenage girls.
30 years ago was 1990, not the dark ages!
Soldato
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Jun 2011
- Posts
- 3,598
I don't give a **** they should deal with these c**** death penalty - Don't care if they are Muslim or of Asian background the please need to grow a pair - FYI I am a British Asian and Muslim - if they were in America/Saudi they would be on death row!!!!
One thing that still baffles me a few months ago on Question Time an audience member said something along the lines of the Koran justifying killing and/or lying to non-Muslims or something like that and the woman who now presents it argument to that was along the lines that they are following a literal translation of the Koran and the majority of Muslims aren't like that... I mean call me all logical and stuff but aren't those who take the literal translation of the Koran the actual real Muslims? it's nice the majority of Muslims don't take the Koran so literally but the terrorists would indeed under those circumstances have a solid argument for saying that the vast majority aren't real Muslims and that doing what they do is sanctioned by the Koran. I have not read the Koran of course it's just a point I'm making regarding something that was said on Question Time which seemed quite eye opening.
I mean is Islam the religion of peace we're told that it is or is it just if you don't take it quite so literally? I guess my point is we're constantly told that terrorists aren't real Muslims compared to the vast majority of peaceful ones but if they're just following the literal writings of the Koran then it sounds like it's the other way around?
I mean is Islam the religion of peace we're told that it is or is it just if you don't take it quite so literally? I guess my point is we're constantly told that terrorists aren't real Muslims compared to the vast majority of peaceful ones but if they're just following the literal writings of the Koran then it sounds like it's the other way around?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 4,301
Can't help but feel the "not in the public interest" stance will simply stoke tensions further.
It's a complex topic. Your at the stage where TB and his spin doctors are doing the thinking for you. They are essentially your spiritual advisors as I'm pretty sure they came up with the term, "religion of peace".
It's the same as any other topic like, do video games cause violence, or, why did Ted Bundy do what he did. Trying to find that missing piece of information that binds everything together like the Theory of Everything in physics. You could go back to Evolution vs Creationism which is kind of randomness vs predetermined but still nobody as far as I'm aware has all the answers.
Islam clearly calls for violence when their teachings are attacked, who uses violence and who doesn't is the above matter.
It depends on the ruleset as to whether Muslims who don't attack are false Muslims.
Is back to basics though, eye for an eye, turn the other cheek etc. When a persons personal sovereignty is comprised then that's when the process of revenge and justice come into effect.
I'm fairly sure that Malcolm X had used that term...
As you say, it basically comes down to certain situations where violence/war is justified and even then some Muslims take a more pacifist approach based on own interpretations.
Although some deny it and blame the issue solely on Islam, world politics and the international arena has had a profound effect on some Muslims/states. A reformation may be needed but perhaps that's not for this thread.
Soldato
Why not just read it and decide for yourself.
As always, meanings get lost in translation.
My understanding is that it is more about submission than peace as such.
Man of Honour
Islam is an ideology of taking and holding absolute power by force and politics. As opposed to Christianity, which is an ideology of taking and holding absolute power by politics and force. Most religions are ideologies of taking and holding absolute power and if there are any that aren't they're irrelevant to anyone other than the followers of those ideologies (and could change at any time). Religion is one of the best tools for authoritarianism, so of course people make up religions for that purpose. Most of them fail, some by just fizzling and some more dramatically (e.g. Branch Davidian, People's Temple).
If a religion gains enough power to become too large to be directly ruled by a single dictator on a personal basis, it's bound to attract some followers who aren't so authoritarian and they'll change the religion to be less harsh. That will cause conflict within the religion, which will either be resolved or result in a split into factions (which can also occur for other reasons, e.g. the main split in islam occured due to argument over who would inherit the dictatorship from the original dictator).
A religious text is a tool to be used in the pursuit of power. It is used by whoever wants to do so in whatever way they want to do it. As long as the text is long enough, it will always be possible to find something in it to interpret into supporting a wide varity of different positions and thus giving any of those positions "divine" authority. Which one wins out is, unsurprisingly, solely about power.
The idea that islam is the religion of peace is just drivel, a silly lie made up for political reasons. It's politically useful, but it's obviously a lie except in the context that any authoritarian ideology is an ideology of peace as long as you submit absolutely to the authorities. Which is the core of what islam is about - submission to the authorities who claim to be proxies for their god and already have enough power to enforce their claims.
It's not just islam, of course. As I said, that's what religions are made up for. Islam just happens to be the biggest threat in the present and for the foreseeable future. Maybe it'll be different at some point in the future. Maybe scientology will gain far more power somehow. Maybe some religion not yet made up will become dominant, joining the ranks of cults that gained enough power to be called religions (that's the difference between a cult and a religion - power) and then conquered widely.
Religion is a weapon, like a gun. Like a gun, it can be used harmlessly despite being designed and built solely as a weapon to kill with. Like a gun, it can be used to do great harm. Or maybe a bomb would be a better analogy, given the catastrophic degree of harm done by religion.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2019
- Posts
- 2,570
Christianity did not start that way when Jesus died and it was Peter writing some books, that was the Romans who bastardised it and called it Catholicism.
Forget any man made religion but look at the ten commandments and think is this not a good set of rules to try and live by.
Forget any man made religion but look at the ten commandments and think is this not a good set of rules to try and live by.
I take it you're too young to remember the fallout from the cartoons of Muhammad published in Denmark a few years ago....
And these are useful for what exactly?
Well you get Saturday off
Permabanned
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2019
- Posts
- 2,570
Nice cherry picking, knew you would be too dense to know what I meant.
“Honor thy father and mother.”
“Thou shalt not kill.”
“Thou shalt not commit adultery.”
“Thou shalt not steal.”
“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.”
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.”
I am not a Catholic and I am not really religious or church going but I do believe in God.
When someone says they believe the 10 commandments are a good set of rules to follow but follow only half of them, then they really aren't a good set of rules.Nice cherry picking, knew you would be too dense to know what I meant.
“Honor thy father and mother.”
“Thou shalt not kill.”
“Thou shalt not commit adultery.”
“Thou shalt not steal.”
“Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.”
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.”
“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.”
I am not a Catholic and I am not really religious or church going but I do believe in God.
A much better set of rules would include:
- don't enslave people
- don't rape women
- don't sexually abuse children
...don't you think?
Abrahamic God?
Do you obey the first four commandments or just the other ones?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2019
- Posts
- 2,570