Myth-Busters: "Islam" Does Not Hate "Us"

[Jamesiv1]

Read the Koran, James, and get back to me on that one. Graham didn't get it right either.

The Heifer 102
And they followed what the devils taught during the reign of Solomon. It was not Solomon who disbelieved, but it was the devils who disbelieved. They taught the people witchcraft and what was revealed in Babylon to the two angels Harut and Marut. They did not teach anybody until they had said, "We are a test, so do not lose faith." But they learned from them the means to cause separation between man and his wife. But they cannot harm anyone except with God's permission. And they learned what would harm them and not benefit them. Yet they knew that whoever deals in it will have no share in the Hereafter. Miserable is what they sold their souls for, if they only knew.

 

[Jamesiv1]

Read the Koran, James, and get back to me on that one. Graham didn't get it right either.

The Heifer 112
In fact, whoever submits himself to God, and is a doer of good, will have his reward with his Lord-they have nothing to fear, nor shall they grieve.

 

[Jamesiv1]

Read the Koran, James, and get back to me on that one. Graham didn't get it right either.

The Heifer 136-137
Say, "We believe in God; and in what was revealed to us; and in what was revealed to Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the Patriarchs; and in what was given to Moses and Jesus; and in what was given to the prophets-from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we surrender."

If they believe in the same as you have believed in, then they have been guided. But if they turn away, then they are in schism. God will protect you against them; for He is the Hearer, the Knower.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Did you think I was talking about the Crusade? Its about Molyneux and how the guy cannot be trusted?

I am not a fan of Molyneux. Nobody can take 2 hours to express 5 minutes worth of info like Stefan. But Molyneux was talking about the Crusades, and you were arguing against him. It is a logical fallacy to poison the well. You can love or hate someone, or someone can only be correct 1 time out of 1000, but their identity is irrelevant to the information they are providing. Molyneux is either right or wrong in that video. If he is wrong, explain your reasoning. If he is right, then explain your reaction. If you refuse to watch a Molyneux video out of general principle, then say so in a way that doesn't indicate a bias on the subject matter.

 

[Jamesiv1]

Read the Koran, James, and get back to me on that one. Graham didn't get it right either.

The Heifer 188
And do not consume one another's wealth by unjust means, nor offer it as bribes to the officials in order to consume part of other people's wealth illicitly, while you know.

 

[Jamesiv1]

Read the Koran, James, and get back to me on that one. Graham didn't get it right either.

Heck, I don't even have a problem with these:

The Heifer 190-194
And fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not commit aggression; God does not love the aggressors.

191. And kill them wherever you overtake them, and expel them from where they had expelled you. Oppression is more serious than murder. But do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque, unless they fight you there. If they fight you, then kill them. Such is the retribution of the disbelievers.

192. But if they cease, then God is Forgiving and Merciful.

193. And fight them until there is no oppression, and worship becomes devoted to God alone. But if they cease, then let there be no hostility except against the oppressors.

194. The sacred month for the sacred month; and sacrilege calls for retaliation. Whoever commits aggression against you, retaliate against him in the same measure as he has committed against you. And be conscious of God, and know that God is with the righteous.

 

[Wilf]

I am not a fan of Molyneux. Nobody can take 2 hours to express 5 minutes worth of info like Stefan. But Molyneux was talking about the Crusades, and you were arguing against him. It is a logical fallacy to poison the well. You can love or hate someone, or someone can only be correct 1 time out of 1000, but their identity is irrelevant to the information they are providing. Molyneux is either right or wrong in that video. If he is wrong, explain your reasoning. If he is right, then explain your reaction. If you refuse to watch a Molyneux video out of general principle, then say so in a way that doesn't indicate a bias on the subject matter.

Molyneux tired to: justify imperialism as libertarian as possible, presented a poorly research video on the Canadian elections, tried to justifying major immigration restrictions, defooing and mostly pandering to warmongers.

 

[Danke]

Molyneux tired to: justify imperialism as libertarian as possible, presented a poorly research video on the Canadian elections, tried to justifying major immigration restrictions, defooing and mostly pandering to warmongers.

Deconstruct the video.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Molyneux tired to: justify imperialism as libertarian as possible, presented a poorly research video on the Canadian elections, tried to justifying major immigration restrictions, defooing and mostly pandering to warmongers.

You are still poisoning the well. That is a logical fallacy. What is your opinion of his treatment of the Crusades?

 

[thoughtomator]

This is a strange statement. Jews and Christians are mentioned as 'People of the Book' in the Quran and are actually given a higher status compared to other non-believers in the Islamic faith. I've actually studied the Quran and I can definitely say you are 100% wrong. I usually don't reply to these kinds of things cause I hate religious discussions online so hopefully this is my last post in this topic.

I didn't actually get into that part, however I'll address it. "Higher status compared to other non-believers" AKA dhimmitude is still a state of slavery. Not much of a status to aspire to, really - and if you find that a satisfactory arrangement from the point of view of the non-muslim, there is something very wrong with you.

Go back and actually read the Koran. Make a tic mark on a sheet of paper every time it condemns the unbeliever, and a tic mark on another sheet of paper every time it says something positive about non-muslims.

(Hint: you only actually need one sheet of paper to perform the exercise.)

 

[Jamesiv1]

I didn't actually get into that part, however I'll address it. "Higher status compared to other non-believers" AKA dhimmitude is still a state of slavery. Not much of a status to aspire to, really - and if you find that a satisfactory arrangement from the point of view of the non-muslim, there is something very wrong with you.

Go back and actually read the Koran. Make a tic mark on a sheet of paper every time it condemns the unbeliever, and a tic mark on another sheet of paper every time it says something positive about non-muslims.

(Hint: you only actually need one sheet of paper to perform the exercise.)

How about you quote some verses you find offensive?

 

[Wilf]

This explains most of the reasons why Trudeau won.

However, he missed others facts like:

-The Duffy scandal and how it affected the poll numbers.

- The niqab ban and how it forced the left to centre vote to unite

- The oil crash and how Harper presented himself as the only person that can save the economy

- Income splitting and how un-libertarian it is.

- Bill C-22 and how it remove due process for dual citizens

- the Conservative party courting Tom Mulclair, the leader of the socialist party.

- Some of their candidates weird acts

- Alan Kurdi's death and their ridiculously reaction

- Lynton Crosby and his style of politics.

- Bill C51, Canadian Patriot Act

- The (Progressive) Conservative party history

There is a lot more examples but in the long run short; he made this video sound why Steven Harper should have been Prime Minister.

 

[Danke]

Wilf won't answer any direct questions.

 

[Wilf]

You are still poisoning the well. That is a logical fallacy. What is your opinion of his treatment of the Crusades?

He tired to make the Crusades sound like it was a good thing with the word types and his tone.

 

[thoughtomator]

Wild won't answer any direct questions.

I can smell the bad faith all the way from the other side of the Atlantic.

 

[Wilf]

Wild won't answer any direct questions.

His video was basically talking balance budgets and did not look at the main reason why Harper was voted out: his corruption and his lack of trust among voters..

 

[GunnyFreedom]

He tired to make the Crusades sound like it was a good thing with the word types and his tone.

What makes you believe that the Crusades were not "a good thing?"

Bear in mind that Stefan Molyneux is a rabid atheist who has in the past gone on rants against Christianity, so if he has any bias at all, it would be against the crusades.

 

[Wilf]

What makes you believe that the Crusades were not "a good thing?"

Bear in mind that Stefan Molyneux is a rabid atheist who has in the past gone on rants against Christianity, so if he has any bias at all, it would be against the crusades.

Sorry, my reason against Molyneux has to be based on his ideas that "imperialism" was a good thing. In this case, he is using the Crusade as a way to justify it without taking into consideration that the end game was to enforce puppets kingdoms to meet the Crusaders demands.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Sorry, my reason against Molyneux has to be based on his ideas that "imperialism" was a good thing. In this case, he is using the Crusade as a way to justify it without taking into consideration that the end game was to enforce puppets kingdoms to meet the Crusaders demands.

Demands.... like “stop attacking our cities, raping our women, and killing our children?” Why do you believe these "demands" are so bad?

 

[Wilf]

Demands.... like “stop attacking our cities, raping our women, and killing our children?” Why do you believe these "demands" are so bad?

What makes you think that these puppet kingdom would have stopped that? I mean your argument could have been used to justify all wars.