Should we fear Islam?

A short but interesting read

http://www.associatedcontent.com/art...lam.html?cat=9

[ubs]

I'm waiting to see what the Chinese do. I was surprised when they capitulated and fired the mayor of Urumqi at the request of the Uighurs.

[just questions]

ubs wrote

I'm waiting to see what the Chinese do. I was surprised when they capitulated and fired the mayor of Urumqi at the request of the Uighurs.

The one got fired is the party secretary. Not at the request of the Uighurs, but more to soothe the Han Chinese, as they were really angry at the government being too soft with the Uighurs, failing to protect them.
What happened in Urumqi is mainly ethnic violence, rather than religious conflict. At least not yet. But we know the Jihads will try jump into this shit to stir up more violence.

[Smellyoldgit]

[ILOVEJESUS]

I think that piece just echoes what most of us know unfortunately. I live in Luton Uk. This is a very "multi culteral " area lol. You saw what happened to British troops when they walked the streets here on return from duty. All religion is to be feared as it is based on superstition , fear, and someone telling you what you should be thinking.

[Captain Relativity]

Well of all the extant world religions, Islam is without question the most "explosive". So to answer your question, yes, if we have any common sense whatsoever, we will continue to fear Islam for the threat to humanity and civilization that it is.

Religion sucks,

Ok, 1500 years ago some asshole
is sitting in a fucking cave,
hallucinating from the advanced
syphilis eating up his brain,
which probably explains the hatred
for women through out the text,
and in this delusional state
he scratches out 'The WORD OF GOD'
It's funny that the people who keep posting against the author or article in the comments section of the article neglect to mention things like the fact that Mohammad had a thing for little girls.

Poetical huh?

So now we ask the obvious question. . .
Why is religion so violent and sexually repressed?

[Riddler]

It isn't. Religion is an abstract noun. People are violent and sexually repressed.

Riddler wrote

It isn't. Religion is an abstract noun. People are violent and sexually repressed.

I completely agree. Religion is a crutch and an excuse to whatever a man does that's morally wrong. At least that's what I've observed in recent years.


Last year, I was staying at an Augusta hotel and there was some sort of religious convention going on. All they did was explain how Jesus was telling them this and Jesus was telling them that. God was making them do something and it was their will to fulfill the prophecy. Times like these, I wish we could open their eyes and tell them that its their own wants and needs being altered in their head to make their goals seem morally correct.

[calpurnpiso]

AngryAtheist wrote

Religion sucks,

Ok, 1500 years ago some asshole
is sitting in a fucking cave,
hallucinating from the advanced
syphilis eating up his brain,
which probably explains the hatred
for women through out the text,
and in this delusional state
he scratches out 'The WORD OF GOD'
It's funny that the people who keep posting against the author or article in the comments section of the article neglect to mention things like the fact that Mohammad had a thing for little girls.

Poetical huh?

So now we ask the obvious question. . .
Why is religion so violent and sexually repressed?

The hatred for the caves of creation(women) was not due to venereal disease. It was rare in hominids & cave men due to the strong antibodies they had. An example of this today are canids. All male dogs have neisseria gonohrrea, it doesn't bother them.

Ancient males shun women due to menstruation & the very strong fetid Ichthyo-pheromonic body emanations. They did no have perfume in those days. Though males were horny they couldn't do anything during menstruation or pregnancy. This frustration resulted in damnation placing women as subservient to men.

This was not a problem in very young women ( children by our standards today ). At the age of puberty when females were ready to reproduce the pheromones were enticing. They would become a repulsive stench as women grew older. In Abrahamic Psychosis, women begun to be covered head to toes, to protect men from arousal when young & protect men's eyes from ugly hairy old women during senectude.

ALL MEN without exception were SEXUALLY attracted to "little" girls when they reached puberty. Only christ-psychotics would find girls sexually attractive BEFORE reaching puberty ( 3,5,6,8 ). The problem rests in the mistranslation of texts. In ancient times men could be engage to be marry to a 5 or 6 yr old, She would be treated as a DAUGHTER till she reached puberty & her vagina could accept the resurrected god & savior.

This is exactly what happen in the case of Muhammad. He was already married to a much older woman, but very WEALTHY. Aisha was chosen for her smooth unblemished skin & youth. ( she was 6). Christ-psychotics in their deep ignorance label Muhammad a child molester when they could not see the true Christ psychotic child molestors in themselves.

Today the retards ( people of faith) forget we are evolved mutated primates that created gpd & other delusions of the supernatural with our BRAINS when they malfunction.

[Captain Relativity]

calpurnpiso wrote

Ancient males shun women due to menstruation & the very strong fetid Ichthyo-pheromonic body emanations. They did no have perfume in those days. Though males were horny they couldn't do anything during menstruation or pregnancy. This frustration resulted in damnation placing women as subservient to men.

This was not a problem in very young women ( children by our standards today ). At the age of puberty when females were ready to reproduce the pheromones were enticing. They would become a repulsive stench as women grew older.

Thanks for the laffs.

[Sternwallow]

An e-mail received today --

Some words of encouragement from the Koran (via www.unreasonablefaith.com):

Here’s some encouragement from the Koran for non-Muslims: Sura (8:55) - Surely the vilest of animals in Allah’s sight are those who disbelieve

Sura (48:29) - Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves

Sura (9:30) - And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah… Allah (Himself) fights against them. How perverse are they!

Sura (8:12) - I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them

Sura (9:123) - O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness

Sura (5:33) - The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement

Now, how exactly is a devout Muslim supposed to behave when he is among diverse cultures including a high percentage of non-believers? What constitutes a "moderate" Muslim, given the above verses? Just how "peaceful" and "tolerant" are we supposed to believe Islam is?

__._,_.___

Sternwallow wrote

An e-mail received today --
Now, how exactly is a devout Muslim supposed to behave when he is among diverse cultures including a high percentage of non-believers? What constitutes a "moderate" Muslim, given the above verses? Just how "peaceful" and "tolerant" are we supposed to believe Islam is?

__._,_.___

I don't see any way to view them other than murdering fanatics

[anthonyjfuchs]

Simple Mind wrote

I don't see any way to view them other than murdering fanatics

I view them exactly as I view Christians; they just believe a different mythology.

Keep in mind that the percentage of Muslims who are "murdering fanatics" is probably about the same as the percentage of Christians who are murdering fanatics. And also keep in mind that comparing modern Islam with modern Christianity is an inaccurate contrast; modern Islam is only 1400 years old, so it must be compared to 15th Century Christianity.

The real difference, obviously, is that 1400-year-old Islam has access to better weapons than 1400-year-old Christianity. That, obviously, is why Christians are so bent out of shape about Islam today. They're jealous that they didn't have nuclear weapons during the Crusades.