- Status
Sponsored Links
Eh? 44.5 million Germans i.e 98% is not a tiny percentage boyo.
- Joined
- 17 May 2012
- Messages
- 10,786
- Reaction score
- 850
- Country
But that didn't stop Christians killing millions of people to further the reach of their religion. So that does not make them all that good really, does it?
As I said before, if you tally up all the deaths caused by different religious, Christianity is way ahead in the killing innocent people game.
Sponsored Links
Yes I am aware of what you said. You told Andy that it's not the evil in the individual Muslims, but it is the evil of Islam.
So what is evil about Islam that you think is absent from other religions?
I appreciate you dancing around the issue, but you made a sweeping statement, now I'm asking you to elucidate that statement.
What is it about Islam that you think is evil, that is absent in other religions?
Or do you think that they are all equally evil, but omitted to include that?
B
Bodd
Most people of Iraq or Afghanistan my guess are good decent human beings. Its the evil of the Taliban, Isis as well as other groups that live under the banner of Islam thst are evil. This evil rules these lands. The Evil of Christianity does not rule America or the UK. The Evil of Buddhism dies not rule Sri Lanker nor does the evil of Hinduism rule India. But there is evil in most if not all religion .
Will that do you for tonight?
Homosexuality only became legal in the UK 50 years ago.
Abortion is illegal in Northern Ireland.
Abortion was only decriminalised nationwide in the USA in 1973 and Christian lobby groups are trying to overturn the Roe v. Wade ruling.
India has mistreated dalits for centuries.
Myanmar has recently witnessed horrific ethnic cleansing by Buddhists. The evil of Buddhism in Sri Lanka? 50,000 civilian Tamil Hindus were murdered between 1983 and 2004.
Perhaps TR should denounce and rally against all religions.
B
Bodd
I am confused, you have posted a link that confirms my point, and which is counter to your claim that the "evils of Buddhism" don't rule Sri Lanka.
The other examples that I cited, were examples of Christianity and other religions interfering in politics and legislation, resulting in a negative impact on the citizens of those countries. Again counter to your suggestion that Islam is the only religion that harms people.
I wouldn't want to live in Iraq or Afghanistan, I like pubs too much. I prefer to live in a country that tolerates people of all skin tones and religions. That however is not the kind of country that TR and his followers want.
Maybe we are getting to the nub of the problem with your statement. It was perhaps an over generalisation, not accurate and unfair.
You now concentrate on specific groups who happen to be adherents of a particular religion. No-one would disagree with you that ISIS, Taliban, et al are an evil cult. But a cult they are. They follow the same interpretation of Islam as Saudi Arabia. So maybe Saudi Arabia could be included in the overall identification of evil cults.
But if you identify specific cults and misappropriate them as the wider religion, then you are being overly-general, inaccurate and unfair.
For instance, you wouldn't condemn all Catholics because Sinn Fein were predominantly Catholic, or suggest that Catholicism was evil because of the troubles. Or condemn all Buddhists because Myanmar Buddhists are practising ethnic cleansing, nor suggest that Buddhism is evil because of those issues, etc.
Such overly general sweeping statements creates the wrong impression, creates and multiplies prejudice and does nothing for the writer's reputation.
In addition, I don't see how you can suggest that a religion is evil, but then suggest that the adherents of that religion are OK.
It's like suggesting that Conservative policy is inhumane, but Conservatives are OK. If the policy is inhumane, it requires people to enact that policy. Therefore how can those actors be OK, when enacting an evil policy or religion?
Sure, some adherents of the policy or religion, those that practice the inhumane or evil interpretations of the policies or religions, must by definition be evil, or acting under duress, or be genuinely incapable of deciding for themselves. But those that don't practice or enact those inhumane or evil policies or religious bits, are OK, normal people. Invariably, the vast majority of them.
As others have said, all religions have their inhumane or evil bits in them, but only a tiny minority of people choose to live by those bits of the policy or religion, and force others, against their will, to do likewise. We need to be more precise about who or what we describe as evil, to avoid spreading and multiplying prejudice. We both know that some are easily influenced.
I don't disagree with what you have written - BUT
surely then, it follows that only the evil ones are truly following their religion.
The 'good' ones, who discount the evil parts cannot therefore be true followers of that religion, although obviously decent people.
Perhaps the 'good' muslims would actually like to give it up completely but are afraid of reprisals from the evil ones in their communities.
Christians, by definition, follow Christ, who seems to be a decent fellow, so discounting the Old Testament can be seen as a legitimate thing to do.
The trouble with islam (while not an expert on the koran) is that the koran does not have an old and new testament, so islam can validly be described as an evil religion because it still includes all the evil parts.
This, of course, presupposes that any religion has an origin in something other than man-made stories.
surely then, it follows that only the evil ones are truly following their religion.
The 'good' ones, who discount the evil parts cannot therefore be true followers of that religion, although obviously decent people.
Perhaps the 'good' muslims would actually like to give it up completely but are afraid of reprisals from the evil ones in their communities.
Christians, by definition, follow Christ, who seems to be a decent fellow, so discounting the Old Testament can be seen as a legitimate thing to do.
The trouble with islam (while not an expert on the koran) is that the koran does not have an old and new testament, so islam can validly be described as an evil religion because it still includes all the evil parts.
This, of course, presupposes that any religion has an origin in something other than man-made stories.
B
Bodd
I'm confused I thought you was questioning my point with a? Mark
- Status
Sponsored Links
Similar threads
