I'm an atheist pal I was just looking to wind a few women up tonight but nobody bit :laugh:

Are people in this thread seriously trying to make the claim that Christianity is good and Islam is evil? I think there are very few people on this planet who are qualified to make such an argument. The delusion is very high if forum members on a Big Brother forum seriously think they can make that claim. Good luck Ladies and gentlemen but I don't think any of you know anywhere near enough to be having this discussion.

I refer you to my recent post.

yes I am saying Christianity is a great thing and Islam is not

:laugh:

I don't agree at all. Dezzy. Here is his post in its entirety:

Originally Posted by the truth:
"complete made up lies..........its nothing to do with the media.......the truth is radical islam is blowing innocent people up across the globe in random acts of horrific terrorism..........you actually dare to belittle the evil they do and pass it off as the fault of the media or other religions...we see through your lies. its radical islam and it needs to be targetted"

There is no "hysterics" here - just stating of facts: There is no ignorance - but quite the reverse; knowledgeable and valid comment.There is no nonsense - only truth:

A) Radical Islamics are blowing up and murdering innocent people across the globe with sickening frequency.

B) If the above is true - which it irrefutably is - then the media can only report it.

C) He is careful to specify 'Radical' Islam and not all Islam, which is the truth.

D) The Media and/or other religions are not the cause of the atrocities perpetrated by these terrorists, so he is right to state as much.

I really don’t believe that we will progress matters on this thread (or any other) until some basic facts are first proposed, examined, and mutually accepted and agreed upon, so that once such facts are established, we do not all keep futilely moving around in argumentative circles.

It is, after all, banal for any of us to ask questions or make erroneous statements in a post, then have those questions legitimately answered or such misconceptions corrected in a response (with corroboration) only for the original poster to then ignore the response and pose the same questions and make the same erroneous statements in a subsequent post.

I am not advocating that anyone should defer to anyone else’s views, even if such views are more plausible and backed up by the superior evidence, but what I am saying, is that it would aid proper debate if we all did address points made in counter responses – even if at the end of any debate we just agree to amicably disagree.

For example; no one is stating that all Islam is responsible for these atrocities, or that the majority of peace-loving, moderate Muslims are, only that Islamac Fundamentalist Terrorists are. Yet post after post works from a false premise that people are blaming all Islam or all peace-loving moderate Muslims.

It gets us nowhere.

Christianity preaches to love thy neighbour and welcome everybody, Islam preaches to surrender to God and you will live in paradise.

Most peaceful law-abiding Muslims especially if they live in the West, need to study their faith a bit more and ask themselves some serious questions about what their religion actually espouses.

It promotes intolerance of other religions this resulting in division,exclusion and disconnectivity which is not the normal human state.

It demands obediance upon pain of punishment and possibly death. This is not enlightening but rather oppressive and bullying/controlling.

It promotes conversion of other faiths to Islam and considers Non Muslims as lesser people or worse. This is arrogant, immoral and confrontational.

It considers it the duty of all Muslims to promote the Muslim agenda even if they live in a Non Muslim land. This is treasonable and highly divisive.

All of the above applies to ALL Muslims these are the central tenets of their "peaceful" faith which as you can see is not peaceful at all.

Now I have deliberately tried to avoid this post being construed as Hate speech and therefore removed by the Mods. I want to have a sensible debate about these issues and try and see if there is room for reform to move away from these unfortunate religious principles which in a Christian Country are a red rag to a bull.

:worship::worship::worship: You have excelled yourself. (if only we all could debate this sensibly without all the usual overly defensive, overly aggressive, irrational lashback)

24% of uk muslins agree with paris attack


http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31293196

This is very illuminating and would seem to destroy a fair few arguments that all Muslims are peace loving and anti-terrorist. Thank you LT.

She is beautiful and her words are welcome and very, very moving, but one Muslim denouncing Islamic terrorism does not rebut Nedusa's contentions or equate to LT's post above which states that a massive 24% of UK Muslims AGREE with the Paris atrocities.

To put it into perspective, that's nearly 800,000 UK domiciled Muslims whose loyalties lie more with Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists than they do with the Western democracy which welcomed them (or their parents) in and which freedoms they are enjoying.

It all kind of destroys all the erratic, irrational arguments against my posts for a start. Nuff said.

It's hypocritical for you to in one thread berate me for disagreeing with someones view and in this one suggest that anyone who doesn't think how you, LT and nedusa think have an 'erratic, irrational argument'.

Christianity also preaches and eye for an eye then later preaches turn the other cheek. Its very contradictory.

It that all Islam teaches? I thought it taught a little bit more than that, IF that is all you've taken from Islam then you are the exact person I'm referring to in my original post.

Well in the interests of clarity the statement was "I have some sympathy for the motives behind the Charlie Hebdo attack" and 27% agreed out of a sample size of 1,000. That is different to agreeing with the attack and those 1,000 are not necessarily representative. Yes it is still worrying, but no one has said that all Muslims are anti-terrorist as you said above, that is self-evidently wrong.

That poll also found that 95% of those asked felt a loyalty to Britain. Do you not think that is welcome?

Also, I think it would depend on how you interpret the question, "Do you have some sympathy behind the motives" a Muslim person could take to mean, that they agree that the cartoons were offensive to them but not necessarily mean they agree with the action of "revenge" carried out.

I think if the question was more like "Do you agree that the Charlie Hebdo attack was not an extreme reaction to the cartoon" or something like that the number may have been lower

If true this is a disgraceful statistic, I rather suspected the majority of Muslims agree in principal to the ideals behind the attack if not the murderous methods employed.

But to think that a quarter of UK Muslims agree with the attacks themselves and the resulting violent assassination of these journalists is almost too much to believe.

I can't imagine however if questioned a 1/4 of UK Muslims saying such a thing so perhaps I should take this statistic with a large pinch of salt.

Oh dear; I've never ever berated anyone for disagreeing with anyone's viewpoint - can you please expound so that I can apologise if I have?

Also, I am not suggesting that anyone who disagrees with me, LT and Nedusa are "erratic" and irrational" at all, or that all their arguments are, and you are misinterpreting what I said. When I said:

"It all kind of destroys all the erratic, irrational arguments against my posts for a start. Nuff said."

I was talking about specific arguments as being irrational (in my opinion) in certain posts which have criticised my posts or opposed the points I've made in them, not all posts in general. "All the erratic, irrational arguments" - not "all arguments".

I am opinionated, and outspoken, but I totally believe in what I write, and I do not ever write to 'try to be clever', or to merely elicit applause or admiration (in fact I have lost admirers because of my views) I write because I am driven, and there are many things which I know and have experienced which have shaped my views, but which I cannot post on an open forum because it may endanger my family.

I welcome any honest and reasoned debate or discussion.

Of course I do think that it's welcome that 95% of those questioned felt a loyalty to Britain, I wish it was 100%.

Again, I can only take surveys at face value and not try to second guess how truly representative of the UK Muslim population those surveyed really were, or to what degree their self-confessed sympathy for the motives behind the Paris murders were.

My own true and extensive personal experience is that the survey at face value actually reflects the attitudes to IS of a lot of domiciled UK Muslims.

Finally, a lot of posts on here have implied and/or insinuated that all UK Muslims are anti-terrorist, and I could search and reproduce such posts if I had to but I see no reason to.

"I have some sympathy for the motives behind the Charlie Hebdo attack"

what kind of sick human would even voice this to a friend never mind an actual survey?


it beggars belief

It's a question designed to obscure the vote. Asking about the "motive" rather then just the attack itself is going to make people give a different answer. You can agree that Muslims might be offended without agreeing with what they actually did in response to it

I wish they had just asked them

Do you know that all that prophet and god stuff you were brainwashed with by your parents and elders is utter bollocks?

no?

well newsflash it is and you have been murmuring under your breath to no one

Shut up, Trumpet, you heathen.

And what about the 76% who don't? Are you going to ignore them?