Thanks! It’s a rare post such as yours – thoughtful, respectful, and straightforward( not entangled by political correctness ) – that makes bit a TP reader.

Being one of the few overtly conservative Christians posting on the TP bit feels obligated to point out that the Quran bears little semblance to the New Testament, which is the basis of Christianity. Somehow, bit thinks you probably already knew that.

One author writes that with Islam one always characterizes the belief with RPM: religion, politics, and military, which seems to summarize your post well.

Here’s a quote about the religion made in the early days of the U.S.

The referenced articles is from WorldNetDaily and is written by Judge Roy Moore, the Alabama Judge who got in trouble from his Ten Commandments monument. Some liberals may have trouble understanding the implications of the quote.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=94998

To whom should we bow?
————————————————————–

Last Sunday was a great day as we celebrated the resurrection of our Lord, Jesus Christ. On that day we also received news that Navy SEALs rescued Capt. Richard Phillips of the USS Maersk Alabama from Somali pirates.

Piracy and enslavement of others on the Mediterranean off the coasts of Africa is nothing new. For centuries Muslims have seized ships and raided coastal villages, taking captives and holding them for ransom or selling them as slaves in foreign ports.

In the late 1700s, as America was beginning its commerce with world powers, she reluctantly followed European powers that paid annual tribute to Muslim rulers to ensure the safety and protection of their ships and crews. In 1786, when the Muslim rulers demanded more than Congress could budget for tribute, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams traveled to London to negotiate with the ambassador from Tripoli, Sidi Haje Abdrahaman. When asked by what right Tripoli could claim tribute from nations that had done no injury to his country, Abdrahaman’s answer revealed much about Muslim attitudes and policies toward the West. Jefferson and Adams reported that Abdrahhaman said:

“It was written in their Quran that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet (Muhammad) were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful (Muslims) to plunder and enslave; and that every Muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise.”

…
————————————————————–

BTW, bit would be interested in hearing your predictions about this conflict between Islam and everyone else.

All my life I’d believed that Islam was “a great global religion of peace and tolerance.” Perhaps you were raised with the same litany. I even called people to task who were dissing Islam online.

In around 1994, though, I began to have some doubts. So I did what came naturally: I STUDIED Islam. Not from news media, politicians or any other second-hand sources. I went straight to the “horse’s mouth,” and let Islam explain ITSELF to me in its own terms. That’s about as fair as you can get.

I was looking for confirmation of the litany that I still felt HAD to be true. Instead, what I learned stood my hair on end.

I learned that there cannot BE such a thing as a “moderate” Muslim, just for starters. You either believe the whole thing or you are not a Muslim at all. If you’re not a Muslim, you’re an infidel, and the Quran says, “an infidel is worse than a murderer.” THAT is how your moderate friends MUST see you. So the moderates you may know have either been wazooed into Islam with lies about its true nature, or they want to selectively believe the faith (which isn’t allowed), or they are faking moderation for reasons of their own – unlovely ones, to our point of view. To those defending their moderate Muslim acquaintances, I can only say, “remember Glasgow.” THEY ought to know that moderation isn’t allowed in Islam. By its very nature, it is absolutist, and that applies to all of the Islamic “subdivisions,” cults and sects.

There may BE Muslims who don’t want to jihad, who want to tone down the absolutist rhetoric in their holy books, but are they, then, still really Muslims? They are NOT. They are called “kufr,” meaning “false Muslims,” and even an infidel is better than one of those. But they’re trying to have their cake and eat it too – being Muslims, but without the nasty parts. Can’t be done. But if and when the call to jihad reaches them, most WILL jihad.

In Islam, Muslims are forbidden to side with any nonbeliever against any believer – no matter how heinous the believer and how innocent the nonbeliever. This applies on a national scale, too; a fellow Muslim (or Muslim State) can do no wrong. Period. Even when they DO.

In Islam, there is no such thing as an atrocity – when it serves the believers’ desires. The concept of universal human rights is utterly alien in Islam.

Muslims can no more change the Quran and Hadith than Christians can try to relabel the Ten Commandments as the Ten Suggestions. Can’t be done.

Islam MANDATES violent jihad. If he goes to his maker without having done so, he’ll face Allah’s wrath.

Islam’s prime directive is total global domination – and by ANY means whatever. Has it escaped your notice that NONE of the Islamic States is criticizing, much less doing a “regime change” in Sudan? It means the genocide is fine as paint to them. As long as Muslims are doing it, of course.

Islam IS tolerant and peaceful – but people forget to mention that these traits only apply to other Muslims. For infidels like us, there ARE NO RULES.

Islam has always converted by the sword and still does. The Quran has one little phrase, written BEFORE Muhammad had gained a powerful military base: “There shall be no compulsion in religion.” Every Muslim will point to that as proof that forced conversions don’t happen in Islam. Except for one tiny detail: Muhammad himself started converting by the sword. That made the earlier phrase totally moot, overwritten, void, meaningless. And Muslims have been forcing conversions ever since, because Muhammad is the “role model of a perfect Muslim,” and all Muslims are required to emulate him. So much for no forced conversions. But I’d bet your “peaceful” Muslim friends will point to that overwritten phrase in the Quran. Want to try it out?

Still, don’t be too quick to judge them, because the REAL Muslims who converted them often did so with highly “edited” English versions of the Quran, sweetened up so as to maximize Western conversions. Your Muslim friend could merely be another victim of Islam, rather than a genuine believer, even if he thinks he is. Most downloads of Quran and Hadith are considerably sweetened up, but they can only go so far with it. Your download won’t be as bestial as the Arabic version, but it’ll be hard enough to swallow, count on it.

When Muhammad was asked “about womens’ menses,” he responded by saying, “It is an affliction.” Of course he didn’t know the purpose of this body function. But his god surely would have. So they had to “revise” it in English versions, to make their god seem more knowledgeable.

If you trouble yourself to study Islam, you’ll also learn that it is a religion OF males BY males and FOR males. No other religion can appeal to the inadequate male more than Islam. No wonder it’s growing.

Of COURSE other religions encourage killing or brutality toward women – almost every culture on the planet is inherently sexist, as are their religions. That doesn’t mean Islam isn’t the worst of the bunch. Wife killing happens everywhere, but it took Muslims to introduce beheading to the sport. Now it’s being emulated in many places, including the Mexican drug cartels. Thanks a pantload, Islam.

Please note, too, that Muslims are REQUIRED to cheat and lie to nonbelievers. Why do you suppose all the peace talks that ended with Arafat signing an agreement were broken before the ink dried? He was only being a good Muslim.

Muhammad didn’t give a horse’s patoot if his new “religion” caught on or not. It’s why he never bothered to name his successor. It only mattered to him as a tool through which he could gain instant and unquestioning obedience from his troops, so he could win his many conquests. To him, it was a “throwaway” faith; he could never have guessed it would catch on as it did. He committed a multitude of horrific atrocities. So atrocities in the name of the faith are still deemed to be just fine.

But he brought a “permission-giver” faith to the world, where people (men, actually) were encouraged to live up to their worst male traits. Little things like “thou shalt not kill” still apply, but only to other Muslims, and there are areas where killing is mandated – for the sake of the faith, of course. Then killing can be fun. Of course it became popular. Our species has never civilized itself away from its predatory and sadistic nature – and religions (particularly Islam) have nurtured it.

And his idea of using religion to win conquests is as good today as it was then. Our own recently revised Christianity, the bornagains, are using it to take over our country right now.

Religion – any one of them – can be a tool for establishing oppressive dictatorships. Given time and world enough ALL religions will become malevolent and oppressive. Religion is a name given to a thing that is institutionalized, and socially acceptable bigotry. “Only WE have the one true faith.” So much for religions being tolerant. Held in their places, they might do some good. Unleashed and allowed to wax political, they will all become monsters. Even if it wasn’t their intention originally. Bigotry is the embryonic form of genocide. It only takes the right circumstances for bigotry to blossom to its fullest. Until we recognize religion as a true bigotry, we will continue to defend it and be lax about its intrusions into our government and other institutions. VERY much to the peril of our democracy.

So Islam isn’t the only culpable religion, by any means. It does happen, however, to be the very worst one – ever.

Islam is essentially visceral and bestial. If you BOTHERED to do your own study, reading the Quran and Hadith cover to cover, and reading up on its history, learning about current Muslim thinking, you’d already know this. Glueing anuses may be new, but it’s entirely consistent with Islam. When Ahmadinijad declared that there ARE no homosexuals in Iran, he left out an important word: There are no homosexuals LEFT in Iran. Have they been glueing anuses all along? Why wouldn’t it surprise me to learn they were?

Is it Islamophobia if I don’t like what I leaned about Islam from their own sources?

I’d suggest you start to hit the books, so you’ll know what you’re talking about regarding Islam, rather than just buying into a bigotry or relying on second-hand sources to feed you your predigested and politically correct attitudes. I know the thought of the world’s 2 billion believers wanting to destroy the rest of us is scary. But is playing ostrich the solution? With Muslims, all over the world, actively taking over whole nations, aren’t you getting just a wee bit worried?

Why, then, do media and politicians keep telling us that old litany? It’s the oil, stupid. Even now, we can’t offend all of Islam, because without oil, our country would implode. Even Obama’s hands are tied in that regard. We can’t offend them – YET. But the environment is NOT Obama’s only reason for wanting us to be free from dependence on oil from countries that hate us.

Islam’s shenanigans impact our part of the world every day, and it impacts many of us quite directly. How can you justify remaining ignorant about it? How can you let second-hand sources tell you what to think? I’m not saying you should conclude what I have concluded here. For you, I, too, am a secondhand source. You can freely ignore what you learn from such sources, but you can’t avoid believing what you have learned FOR YOURSELF. So I AM saying you should get busy and DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK!

Reality shows aren’t worth watching, so spend some quality time with a study of a subject that impacts the world so heavily. THAT is the true reality. Islam is more than a threat to democracies; it’s a threat to humanity itself. And it MEANS BUSINESS. We’d better get serious about countering their moves. If we don’t, and soon, Islam will WIN. I’d call that important.

Get busy, chum.

BTW, neither Iraq nor Afghanistan is a democracy. Iraq is a Shi’ite Islamic State waiting to happen – waiting for us to leave. We might as well. There’s nothing we can do now to stop it. Bush opened the Pandora’s Box and released the sectarian hatred which will now rage on interminably.

And Afghanistan? Read its constitution, the one BUSH, from the depths of his sixth-grade mentality, found acceptable in forming a “democracy” there. It says no law can be written which rubs Islam the wrong way. BINGO! Instant Islamic State. Where ELSE did they get those religious courts that can condemn a man to death for converting from Islam to Christianity? Do ANY other democracies have religious courts? Afghanistan is ruled by a new Taliban, with new faces – and the old Taliban wants back in. It’s still as much an Islamic State as it ever was.

So Bush gave exactly ZERO democracies to those countries; he only unleashed dragons. Bestial as he was, even Saddam wasn’t as bad as what the Shi’ite government now in power will be doing, once we, and our dollars, pull out. At least he maintained order and allowed the country to function at ALL. His methods were brutal oppression of the Shi’ites, but what the Shi’ites will do will make him look like a saint. He’d kept the lid on Pandora’s Box – and for very good reason, despite his horrific methods. He could have asked for help from the international community, but that wouldn’t be “manly,” and if Islam is about any one thing, it is about manliness. He was a Sunni, and they are just as bestial as the Shi’ites. You can’t expect any of them to use non-bestial methods in running their country henceforth. They don’t understand such things. Saddam was merely a bestial product of a bestial culture.

If you bothered to study Islam, you’d quickly realize that it is the inside-out of democracy and of our values and cultures. It is the very antithesis of friendly. It’s the only religion I know of that does NOT regard compassion as a virtue. Or even love. They’re mere unmanly options based on weakness, but okay, so long as utilizing them doesn’t interfere with serving Allah.

And, since Muhammad himself took a 6-year-old bride and had slaves, both pedophilia and slavery are still FULLY acceptable in Islam. And still practiced, including slavery. Other religions were able to grow out of some vile attitudes; Islam is utterly incapable of it.

There ARE no Islamic “extremists,” because none are needed. Islam itself is already extremist enough for anyone.

Our media are no help. They interview a woman, devastated with grief over a husband tortured and beheaded by the “other sect.” The media pull at our heartstrings over his suffering and her plight. Next week, when that woman’s own sect does a bit of torture/beheading of its own, the media have to go to the women of that other sect to make us weep for them. Because the first woman is doing nipups. Maybe you call that objective journalism, but I sure don’t. And I can’t think of any media source that isn’t guilty of this sort of thing.

It’s time we demanded “the facts, just the facts” from our media and dispensed with everything else. Their business goals, agendas and ambitions have supplanted the canon of ethics entirely. Regardless of which partisan leanings they have. We deserve thoroughness and total objectivity. If we don’t get it, goodbye democracy.

Don’t take away my RHF, you wingnut bastard! We like him just fine, just like he is.
______

It’s great that rhf has been accepted back into the fold. It was quite awkward seeing him treated as an outsider when he is clearly one of your own. Still, your praise of him brings to mind posts(not yours)from the rhf-pariah days: ;)

“Speaking of RHF (aka VVGFU, btruthful),
You do know he(?) is just spouting $hit to get a response.
I’ve learned long ago to ignore him(?) with his improper profanities and childish ridicules of the mentally challenged.
Just not worth the effort to debate/discuss, but it is humorous to watch his meltdown every time Zooey posts”

I’m sorry I missed the party. :-)

…approved rule changes that allowed Fannie and Freddie to leverage their lending to 30x and drop their lending standards.

You’re referring of course to the one time he capitulated to the Republican party to accede to those rule changes… while he was the ranking minority party committee member (and thus not actually in a position to block anything) but still the guy to blame for everything.

.

10hourday Says:

If you would calm down and read what I wrote you’d understand that I agree with your statement on Bush.

Right. You accept all wingnut conspiracy theories about which Dems are behind the collapse of everything, but you “hate Bush too.” Which means you’ve got no investment in our political process whatsoever. There sure seem to be a lot of y’all lately. Almost as if you popped into existence from some anti-liberal (but “Bush-hating-too”) dimension.

.

10hourday Says:

…you’re funny … Crazy and just so stupid … look for a keyboard with no CAPs key … pick up a book on logical thinking … the blood pressure…

bitblt Says:

Partial birth abortion strikes bit as another horrific way to die.

Assuming you qualify as “alive.” And frankly since you brought up the comparison, I’d rather have my skull smashed in. That would be considerably more painless and quick. Say, why did you bring up the comparison, anyway?

.

bitblt Says:

bit doesn’t believe he offered his remark as logic.

elbruce emphatically agrees.

.

bitblt Says:

The observation is this: Immoral acts encourage other immoral acts.

Oh wait, that’s not “an observation,” that’s a generalization. bitblt has failed. hard. Poor bitblt.

.

bitblt Says:

bit’s understanding is that the crucifixion of Jesus was a moral act, from the Creator’s point of view. Someone somehow had to “pay for the sins of the world

Does bitblt maintain that Judas Iscariot’s immortal soul resides in Heaven, or in Hell?

So you agree that you COMING HERE to BASH GAYS while SUPPOSEDLY BEING OPPOSED to TORTURING THEM is HYPOCRISY and STUPIDITY? And that YOUR HATRED of GAYS is as INVALID as your CONFLATION of ANY RELATIONSHIP of HOMOSEXUALITY to P*D*FPHILIA? MORON…

April 21st, 2009 at 5:26 pm
______

Sorry, bud, I forgot about that odd belief of yours that you have to hate and want to torture anyone with whom you disagree. Obama and Hillary are both opposed to gay marriage. According to your hopium boy logic, does that mean that they support torturing gays as well? ;)

Some experts say the militias provide vital security in places rife with sectarian violence and therefore many officials in the Shiite-led government tacitly support them. Others say that Shiites, who make up the majority of Iraq’s population, are in favor of militias because, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, they act as protectors and providers of basic services. “It’s a myth to say the militias are bad for Iraq,” says Abbas Kadhim, assistant professor of Islamic studies at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. “They are the only ones providing anything meaningful for Iraqis. The problem [for Iraqis] is choosing between anarchy and a militia that protects you for a price.”

link

Economic hardship, alone, intensifies religious affiliation. We destroyed the country. I am still wondering when Iraq will restore clean water and electricity to pre-invasion levels. I suspect we aren’t really helping that much with rebuilding, seeing as how U.S. contractors have been providing the troops with contaminated water and deadly shower stalls.

Eventually, someone might have to admit that Hussein’s ability to make Iraq a secular nation was quite phenomenal.

Provide a link, 10hourday.

Someone with critical thinking skills needs to look at the data.

10hourday Says:

Zooey

Professor Joseph Olson
Hamline University School of Law
St. Paul , Minnesota

Or you could pull up the U.S. census data and match it with counties won by Dem party in 08.

April 21st, 2009 at 5:46 pm Recommend (0) | Report Abuse
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

WOW only the stupidest of the stupid post EMAILS they havent confirmed. Taken in by a blatant and transparent hoax. THAT is why Zooey said someone with critical thinking skills needss to see your link. She was right. GOOD CALL ZOOEY.

Bit never changes ignorant and bigoted to the end. You are a waste bit. Just think you COULD have been a decent person instead you became, well you, I am sure your mommy cries everytime she thinks that she could have drowned you at birth

“bit’s understanding is that the crucifixion of Jesus was a moral act, from the Creator’s point of view.”

“OTOH, to the people who unjustly accused Him, it was an immoral act. The accusers even violated Jewish rules of evidence.”

Doesn’t say much for the morality of your creator, bit o’ brain…

Your immoral disregard for personal pronouns seems to have lead to your immoral reasoning, bit.

Everyone does something for a reason. No one goes “Hey I’m going to randomly do something! RANDOMLY!”

“Don’t believe this remark would be well received in an AA meeting seeing how addictions basically turn people into “mindless animals” or at the very least people who can’t make a decision “…based on evidence and circumstance.”

Addiction is a mental health issue and in no way has any bearing on the topic of whether immoral acts are contagious.

If everyone was the mental age of 4 then I can see his assertion being true. But fortunately for us, religion doesn’t have that much sway anymore ;).
April 21st, 2009 at 6:48 pm

Is there a reason, justification, or logic for immoral acts somewhere in this remark?

Don’t believe this remark would be well received in an AA meeting seeing how addictions basically turn people into “mindless animals” or at the very least people who can’t make a decision “…based on evidence and circumstance.”

Thanks bit!
April 21st, 2009 at 6:44 pm

bit’s understanding is that the crucifixion of Jesus was a moral act, from the Creator’s point of view. Someone somehow had to “pay for the sins of the world( that’s all the people in the world).” Christ was the perfect, sinless sacrifice who was offered for our sins. This is what Christ is called a sacrificial lamb and this is why Christian’s don’t do animal sacrifice. Christ was the perfect sacrifice.

The New Testament says that Jesus was obedient to the will of the Father, which makes His act of sacrifice a moral act.

The following strikes bit as very moral:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/r/rsv/rsv-idx?type=DIV1&byte=4926419

John 3:16 and following:

For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.
He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

OTOH, to the people who unjustly accused Him, it was an immoral act. The accusers even violated Jewish rules of evidence.

Belaccifer, you spoiled my toying with the troll. The main flaw with his argument is that people are not mindless animals and can make decisions based on evidence and circumstance!

If everyone was the mental age of 4 then I can see his assertion being true. But fortunately for us, religion doesn’t have that much sway anymore ;).

It wasn’t?

Can we then infer that it tends to encourage ‘immoral’ acts in its name?

Thanks bit!