homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums   » News, Reviews, Views!   » Politics/Religion/Current Affairs   » New York Time editorial... The Road Home (Page 4)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!  
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
Author Topic: New York Time editorial... The Road Home
spungo
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1089

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 27, 2007 17:22      Profile for spungo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ASM65816:
Current Score for Bloodiest Religion:   Islam ahead by 7 points to nil.

Gosh, I guess the crusades were all a fiction, then?

I don't really want to get into an argument, 'cos -- quite frankly, they bore me, but all the same, is it not just a wee bit pointless trying to quantify the malice of various religious followers? So what, is it three points for a shooting, and maybe an extra five points for a suicide bombing? Are there style points awarded?

--------------------
Shameless plug. (Please forgive me.)

Posts: 6529 | From: Noba Scoba | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Xanthine

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 736

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted July 27, 2007 17:36      Profile for Xanthine     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Is it the religion or the culture that's such a problem? My impression is it's the latter.

The trouble with fundamentalists and fanatics in general is that, even though they are a minority, they're so fscking noisy and obnoxious that the moderates just get drowned out and lost.

--------------------
And it's one, two, three / On the wrong side of the lee / What were you meant for? / What were you meant for?
- The Decemberists

Posts: 7670 | From: the lab | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
spungo
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1089

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 27, 2007 17:41      Profile for spungo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Xanthine:
The trouble with fundamentalists and fanatics in general is that, even though they are a minority, they're so fscking noisy and obnoxious that the moderates just get drowned out and lost.

Or they're too cowardly to say anything. Much of what is happening in Islam right now is internal: a massive struggle between the moderates and the nutcases for the hearts and minds of Joe Muslim. Trouble is, impassioned fundamentalism sounds a bit more sexy than reason at times. And there's nothing like covert rebellion to attract the fervour of disaffected youth.

--------------------
Shameless plug. (Please forgive me.)

Posts: 6529 | From: Noba Scoba | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted July 28, 2007 02:49      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
RE: Your assesment of the pictures...

I notice that your psycho Muslims weren't parading pictures of beheaded contractors. My psycho Christians however were waving a picture of Matt Shepherd. What do you make of that?

Again, explain why the same behavior is acceptable in Christians but not in Muslims. I didn't see either side waving a sign saying "I'm gonna kill fags" or "I'm gonna kill nonbelievers." I don't think, in light of the hate crimes perpetrated against homosexuals even in America, that you can fairly say that those signs don't convey threat and are not intended to intimidate.

You can certainly find Christians willing to shoot up Jewish pre-schools, beat gay men to death, and bomb abortion clinics... and they do it for their God. Maybe you can explain your theory why, when Christians do those things, we seperate them from the rest of the Christians but when Muslims engage in acts of violence it's used as proof that Muslims and Islam are inherently evil.

Maybe you can ask this guy where he shops:
 -

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 28, 2007 17:50      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rhonwyyn:
I don't discuss politics because there's too much involved for me to feel like I have enough information to form an opinion or cohesive, intelligent statement.

I don't want you to feel persecuted Rhonny, and indeed I generally respect your intelligently expressed and well thought out opinions even when I am diametrically opposed to them. But isn't that statement a bit of a cop out? You are an intelligent and well informed adult with the right to vote. That right carries with it a corresponding moral responsibility to form opinions on the big issues of the day. It would be hard to think of a political issue that is more important than the war, or which has had more coverage and comment in all the different media, so I can't imagine what information you feel you are missing. If after all this you were still afflicted by doubt as to whether this is a just war, I would have thought that that commandment not to kill might take primacy.

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Rhonwyyn

Solid Gold SuperFan!
Member # 2854

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 29, 2007 05:49      Profile for Rhonwyyn   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Don't get me wrong, Calli. I might be a registered Republican, but I'm a pacifist. This "war" was wrong from the get-go. It was totally obvious that there were no WMDs, and I remember when Colin Powell tried to say there were. I think the U.S. should pull out everybody and leave Iraq et al to their own defenses. Literally.

I listen to NPR as much as possible because I like hearing a different perspective. I don't always agree, but at least it's presented calmly and rationally. In fact, that's where I first heard about the presidential candidate I'm leaning toward supporting. I forget his first name, but he's a Congressman from Texas, last name of Paul, I think.

But anyway, I think politics is so terribly complicated, kind of like the way organic chemistry, molecular biology, or quantum physics are complicated. I don't feel qualified to discuss those subjects, and I don't feel qualified to discuss politics. I can see things close to me that are wrong, but looking at the big picture and trying to come up with solutions just isn't my forte.

Besides which, I'm dealing with stuff in my personal life that makes negative attacks on my opinions or beliefs difficult to deal with emotionally. Since politics are such a trigger subject for so many people, I don't feel emotionally strong enough to engage in heavy discussion.

I enjoy reading other people's thoughts, but I don't feel like I know enough to back up my opinions and defend them after expressing them. That's why I got annoyed with TFD and ASM's argumentative tangent. There was a good discussion going, but then they sidelined it. Calm, rational, logical; that's what I prefer and typically politics is not that at all.

--------------------
Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!

Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted July 29, 2007 07:35      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rhonwyyn:
In fact, that's where I first heard about the presidential candidate I'm leaning toward supporting. I forget his first name, but he's a Congressman from Texas, last name of Paul, I think.

Ron Paul is a hypocrite. You cannot simultaneously be against allowing the Supreme Court jurisdiction over issues like reproductive and gay rights (introduction of H.R. 4379) and voting for bills that make federal laws specifically dealing with those issues (HR 760, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act). He also has a nasty habit of ignoring the obligation of the federal government to uphold the Constitutional rights of the people when the states fail to do so. (Voting against the renewal of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964.)

(See, now this is a perfect opportunity to explain why you like Ron Paul and enter into a political discussion. I'll be gentle.)

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rhonwyyn

Solid Gold SuperFan!
Member # 2854

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 29, 2007 09:32      Profile for Rhonwyyn   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ron Paul is his name? Thanks. I kept thinking it was Howard Paul, and I knew that wasn't right.

The reason I said I'm leaning toward him is 'cause of his belief that we should pull out of Iraq and everywhere else and just take care of issues on our own soil. And I'm all for that. In fact, it's Biblical (cf. Matthew 7). How can we expect to solve everyone else's issues if we can't solve our own (welfare, health care, transportation, employment, etc.)? Take all that money and brainpower invested in military stuff and turn it toward the issues within our nation that need help.

Now that I know who to look for, I'll have to do some searching into what other stuff Paul believes. I kinda wonder if for some of those bills, the reason he voted for/against were because of particular clauses or amendments that would have had worse repercussions than the main bill itself. I know some of my Congressmen do that, and while it's frustrating at times, I can respect why they did that. Also, what was the timelapse between the conflicting bills?

I am of the opinion that opinions change, and Congressmen's opinions change, too, so holding one belief at one time and voting as such and then holding a changed belief and voting with that belief in mind is acceptable. Granted, their beliefs might not be acceptable, but I see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to change their beliefs. Isn't that really how compromises are reached? People dialogue until there is a mutually acceptable solution where neither party need sacrifice all of his/her beliefs to work together?

--------------------
Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!

Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted July 29, 2007 12:23      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rhonwyyn:
Ron Paul is his name? Thanks. I kept thinking it was Howard Paul, and I knew that wasn't right.

Now that I know who to look for, I'll have to do some searching into what other stuff Paul believes.

Whenever you get to reading up on it, start a Ron Paul thread and I'd be happy to discuss on the topic. (And that's one of the reasons to engage in political discussion rather than just spectate; you will learn more doing the reading required to hold an intelligent discussion on the topic yourself than you will get from the distillation that makes it into the conversation at hand.)

Myself, I kind of like Dennis Kucinich, even though he won't get the nomination. (Follow the link to his old site for more info.) I'm not in love with him as a candidate, I think his position on reproductive rights leaves something to be desired. I'm also not comfortable with his vote against the Rothman-Kirk Resolution (Ron Paul loses there too). But he does have a plan for pulling us out of Iraq, and he did author House Resolution 333.

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 30, 2007 06:15      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rhonwyyn:
Ron Paul is his name? Thanks. I kept thinking it was Howard Paul, and I knew that wasn't right.

Now that I know who to look for, I'll have to do some searching into what other stuff Paul believes.

Ron Paul is a former Libertarian presidential candidate.

The party he led wanted to legalize child prostitution, and the selling of heroin to school children.

Now if you're thinking he abandoned those policies when he switched parties, just remember this quote from his web site.
quote:
There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul is one of those few


--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10669 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted July 30, 2007 06:40      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Famous Druid:
Ron Paul is a former Libertarian presidential candidate.

And in order to actually be a Libertarian, one must be either a Pollyanna-style optimist or a sociopath.

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
alfrin
Uber Geek
Member # 3836

Member Rated:
4
Icon 12 posted July 30, 2007 09:26      Profile for alfrin     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Is it just me or has ASM reverted to a play format regarding his posts. Part I and Part II's and such. When did this start and when can we have his theatre shut down?

--------------------
Art is Resistance / Resistance is Art

Posts: 813 | From: Nevada, USA | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 30, 2007 16:05      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by alfrin:
Is it just me or has ASM reverted to a play format regarding his posts. Part I and Part II's and such.

A tragedy, a farce, or a comedy of errors?

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10669 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
ASM65816
SuperBlabberMouth!
Member # 712

Member Rated:
2
Icon 2 posted July 31, 2007 18:44      Profile for ASM65816   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The Crusades: How Did Muslims Get a Reputation for Invasions?
quote:
RE: Current Score for Bloodiest Religion --   Islam ahead by 7 points to nil.

Gosh, I guess the crusades were all a fiction, then?

Why don't we look at a graphic timeline.... (for the benefit of people that don't read well)

 -

Fact: The Muslims attacked the Christian lands first.

You probably think it's unfair to say a religion is violent just because it invades two or three countries, so I'll include a list:

Muslim Conquests
  • Byzantine-Arab Wars: 634-750 AD
  • Conquest of Persia: 633-651 AD
  • Conquest of Transoxiana: 662-709 AD
  • Conquest of Sindh: 664-712 AD
  • Conquest of Hispania: 711-718 AD (indicated in graphic)
  • Conquest of the Caucasus: 711-750 AD (end of the Umayyad conquests)
  • Conquest of Sudan: 700-900 AD
  • Conquest of Italy: 831-902 AD
  • Conquest of Anatolia: 1060-1360 AD

... oh and it all started with conquering Mecca (630 AD).

By the way ...

Christianity didn't have the concept of "Holy War" until 1095 AD, when Muslims were invading the Byzantine empire.

"Holy War" (Jihad) had ALWAYS been part of Islam.


--------------------
Once a proud programmer of Apple II's, he now spends his days and nights in cheap dives fraternizing with exotic dancers....

Posts: 1035 | From: Third rock from sun. | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted July 31, 2007 19:31      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
ASM, have you considered other ways of over-compensating for your feelings of inadequacy?
Driving a really big car perhaps?

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10669 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 01, 2007 07:25      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
ASM, the story of the rise and fall of different empires is one of the enduring themes that runs through all history. All empires used religion as a tool for social cohesion morale building etc. Few wars before the twentieth century were fought without the respective armies being blessed by an archbishop or similar entity. I don't think the record of Islam is any worse or better than the dreadful record of Christianity in this respect. One fact may interest you. The Ottoman empire was remarkably tolerant of religious difference, perhaps because Islam is not an evangelical religion. Christian empires on the other hand, have generally imposed their religion on those they conquered.

PS Kudos ASM for a post that is short enough for me to bother to read, and focussed enough that I can actually make a reply. Now if you could now only lose all that crazy formatting that hurts my eyes..... [Smile]

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
nerdwithnofriends
Uber Geek
Member # 3773

Icon 1 posted August 01, 2007 18:54      Profile for nerdwithnofriends     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fs:
quote:
Originally posted by The Famous Druid:
Ron Paul is a former Libertarian presidential candidate.

And in order to actually be a Libertarian, one must be either a Pollyanna-style optimist or a sociopath.
You know, he's actually my favourite candidate at the moment. I just looked at his political positions on the wikipedia, and I pretty much agree with all of them. I wish he'd voice a pro-choice opinion, but from what I read, he's really more interested in not having the federal government intervene at all, which is better than nothing.

I'd thought Obama would be my choice, but I read up on his positions and converted back to republicanism pretty quickly.

--------------------
"The Buddha, the Godhead, resides quite as comfortably in the circuits of a digital computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of a mountain or in the petals of a flower." - Robert M. Pirsig

Posts: 948 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

2015 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0


homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam