If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Ahram Online)   Muslim Brotherhood's Mohammed Mursi wins Egyptian presidential election, becoming the first non-military president of Egypt   (english.ahram.org.eg) divider line 285
    More: News, Muslim Brotherhood, Brotherhood, Egypt, Egyptian, Egyptian presidential, instant-runoff voting  
•       •       •

3256 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jun 2012 at 11:31 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



285 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-24 04:05:07 PM

willyfreddy: [img41.imageshack.us image 499x171]

I don't have time to track down the reference myself, but when the uprising started I vividly recall the Muslim Brotherhood claiming that they have no intention of ever seeking power in Egypt. It would be awesome, and very educational, if someone could find that reference for us.

/shocked that the MB didn't follow through on their word
//not rly


Marine1: Mrtraveler01: Marine1: really, really wonder where all of these crazy creationist Christians are. I mean, according to Fark, I'm one. I am supposed to reject all reason, think that Jesus wanted America to nuke all non-believers (which would include the wonderful woman sitting next to me on the couch at this moment) and stone scientists to death for their blasphemy. I'm supposed to be living in the middle of "Jesus' 'Mericuh" where we all bomb abortion clinics and tell people they're going to hell for being gay. Again, I've never met any of these "nutjob Xtians" that supposedly work to make life miserable for the rest of you.

You live right down the road from Jefferson City and you're asking us this question?

Or do we need to propose a "don't say gay" bill in schools a second time and regulate strip clubs even further for you to realize these loons do exist.

/Disgruntled Missouri Christian

The strip club thing... yeah, but it's more or less offset by the fact that the stretch of interstate known as I-70 between KC and St. Louis is probably the most perverted highway in the country.

As for that dick representative, well, then a Catholic colleague of his came out as gay.

Like I hear about these guys in the news but the way it's said here on Fark (by what would appear to be a bunch of Dawkins acolytes) is that we're all here to impose Biblical law on the land and shiat. It's just not true. Hell, it even comes up in threads not even remotely related to conservative Christians in the US, like this one.


There are absolutely Christians who think US law should be Biblically-based. Ain't a conspiracy, they're right out in the open, and proud of it. Quite a lot of 'em, too. If you read some US history, you'll see there've been a half-dozen fairly major attempts to revise the Constitution to refer to God, etc.
 
2012-06-24 04:09:52 PM

steamingpile: Infernalist: willyfreddy: [img41.imageshack.us image 499x171]

I don't have time to track down the reference myself, but when the uprising started I vividly recall the Muslim Brotherhood claiming that they have no intention of ever seeking power in Egypt. It would be awesome, and very educational, if someone could find that reference for us.

/shocked that the MB didn't follow through on their word
//not rly

I believe the reference you're looking for was a street rep being asked by a BBC reporter if they intended on 'seizing' power and/or instituting Taliban-style Sharia law, which the street rep denied.

The MB is the equivalent to a Christian political party in the U.S. Imagine if the Moral Majority had gone into politics on its own without wedding itself to the GOP.

MB is not equivalent you farking morons, they are for instituting Islamic based laws inside the government, basing your decisions on your religion is a big difference than saying your government follows a religions beliefs.


That's a distinction without a difference for non-believers, however.
 
2012-06-24 04:12:39 PM

Aikidogamer: Mrtraveler01: You mean like a Parliamentary system? I'd love that too but I'm not holding my breath.

I know, right. Take heart in the fact many of the under 40 republicans care more about having a great economy than telling people what morals they should have. There is a tug of war in the party and if the more libertarian wing takes over govt will get cheaper and smaller.


Unfortunately, the money and numbers inside the current Republican party are running roughly 9 - 1 social conservative vs. fiscal conservative.

Just look at state and national Tea Party legislation to date: 9 parts pro-life, 1 part smaller government.
 
2012-06-24 04:19:32 PM

KellyX: [i106.photobucket.com image 454x700]


Not mentioned: the Internet Smartass thinks the glass is full. Half full of water, half full of air.
 
2012-06-24 04:21:47 PM
First, expect to see "pagan monuments", i.e., the Pyramids, Karnak, etc. dynamited. Then, when the tourism dollars dry up, likely they'll make war again with Israel to a, distract the population, and b, reduce some of the surplus Egyptian population.
 
2012-06-24 04:34:56 PM
Democracy: The Choose Your Own Dictator Game.

Yeah, who didn't see this coming a mile away. 1.609 km for our Canadian friends.
 
2012-06-24 04:42:46 PM
The

cynicalbastard: First, expect to see "pagan monuments", i.e., the Pyramids, Karnak, etc. dynamited. Then, when the tourism dollars dry up, likely they'll make war again with Israel to a, distract the population, and b, reduce some of the surplus Egyptian population.


===============

Islam, like Judaism. forbids the making of "graven images" or idols. The pre-Islamic statuary of gods, kings and the like is not allowed. Under strict Sharia law these things would probably be destroyed. The Pyramids and other buildings that are not in the form of 'idols' would probably be OK.
 
2012-06-24 04:44:32 PM

dawnofdaycare: The Spinx and the the statues of the pharaohs are open for being destroyed now, just like like the Buddhist statues destroyed in Afghanistan. Sad.


cdn.bleacherreport.net
Come at me bro
 
2012-06-24 05:12:28 PM
FYI: anyone trying to do a Google Image Search for Mursi might still wind up a bit confused (NSFW, in the National Geographic sense).
 
2012-06-24 05:18:54 PM

Lupine Chemist: Nogale: You really have to wonder about Muslims. They overthrow oppressive regimes - and vote in Islamists.

Now, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has made promises that it won't institute Sharia law, won't force women to cover their hair, etc. Did the Egyptian voters actually buy those promises?

It looks like they are basing their brand of Islamism off of Turkey. Not an entirely bad move. An organically created authentic Middle Eastern democracy won't look like the US or European style, and that is a good thing. Also, women do not cover their head in Turkey and they have an Islamist party governing. I don't actually know their particular stance, but it is not at all that rare to have an explicitly religious party governing an explicitly secular state and like it that way. It would be saying Germany is a Christian hellhole because it's governed by the Christian Democrats.


Say what now? Since the Islamists were voted in, Turkey has been stirring up all sorts of crap. But then, they can attack PKK targets outside their borders in the name of combatting terrorism and no one bats an eyelash.
 
2012-06-24 05:19:20 PM
i577.photobucket.com

Bring back Farouk! He had a pick-pocket show him the ropes so he could filch the shah's jewels and had an extensive elephant pornography collection. I admire this in a politician. That should be the litmus test: an admiration of elephant porn.
 
2012-06-24 05:22:20 PM

PunGent: willyfreddy: [img41.imageshack.us image 499x171]

I don't have time to track down the reference myself, but when the uprising started I vividly recall the Muslim Brotherhood claiming that they have no intention of ever seeking power in Egypt. It would be awesome, and very educational, if someone could find that reference for us.

/shocked that the MB didn't follow through on their word
//not rly

Marine1: Mrtraveler01: Marine1: really, really wonder where all of these crazy creationist Christians are. I mean, according to Fark, I'm one. I am supposed to reject all reason, think that Jesus wanted America to nuke all non-believers (which would include the wonderful woman sitting next to me on the couch at this moment) and stone scientists to death for their blasphemy. I'm supposed to be living in the middle of "Jesus' 'Mericuh" where we all bomb abortion clinics and tell people they're going to hell for being gay. Again, I've never met any of these "nutjob Xtians" that supposedly work to make life miserable for the rest of you.

You live right down the road from Jefferson City and you're asking us this question?

Or do we need to propose a "don't say gay" bill in schools a second time and regulate strip clubs even further for you to realize these loons do exist.

/Disgruntled Missouri Christian

The strip club thing... yeah, but it's more or less offset by the fact that the stretch of interstate known as I-70 between KC and St. Louis is probably the most perverted highway in the country.

As for that dick representative, well, then a Catholic colleague of his came out as gay.

Like I hear about these guys in the news but the way it's said here on Fark (by what would appear to be a bunch of Dawkins acolytes) is that we're all here to impose Biblical law on the land and shiat. It's just not true. Hell, it even comes up in threads not even remotely related to conservative Christians in the US, like this one.

There are absolutely Christians who think US law should be Bi ...


There's tons of everyone that think US law should be based on (insert something the rest of us don't want to live by here) . I just don't know any of these guys that supposedly make up the majority of Christians in this country. And if you guys do, let me know who it is, and as a Christian, I'll try to put them in their place. I mean, I'm a freakin' college student acting alone, but hey, it's worth a shot.

On the other point, again, tons of people want their beliefs (religious and otherwise) shoved into government. You have the Christian stuff listed earlier, then you have Jews wanting the Noahide laws recognized as the basis of our legal tradition, and the list goes on. There are probably atheists of the communist movement (however small) that want to see religion go the way of the dodo through government regulation.

Instead of saying shiat like "Xtian nutjobs", let's go with anyone anywhere who is a fundamentalist on anything. Religion, politics, economics, anything. I'm just tired of coming on here and reading the same crap parroted over and over from Richard Dawkins' talking points about how religion is dangerous and how Christians in the US are somehow supportive of religious fundamentalism in other countries. It's patently false. Find the guys that live sensibly and support them (Jew, Christian, Muslim, atheist, whatever) and tear down the guys who just can't get over differences with others.
 
2012-06-24 05:26:54 PM

hbomb1129: "After his victory was announced, Morsi resigned from the Muslim Brotherhood and the Freedom and Justice Party, in an apparent effort to send the message that he will represent all Egyptians."

Link



Oh hey look! Important information.
 
2012-06-24 05:27:09 PM

AlanSmithee: ObeliskToucher: AlanSmithee: My coworker in my adjacent cubicle is Muslim, from Egypt. As a matter of fact, she voted there and will return back to Canada later this month. And she strongly believes Morsi won't institute Sharia law.

And yet... she's returning to Canada.

/NTTAWWT

Well, she's got citizenship, is smart as a whip, has a well-paying job,and you can be sure she sends money back home. Oh, and she loves Canada. And Egypt too. Turns out she'd like Egypt to be a bit more like Canada. By living here and telling her relatives back in Egypt how great democracy is, I think she's doing good.


All good reasons to come back, of course. Good luck to her and the Egyptians, but the radicals usually get the upper hand early in a revolution (through organization and ruthlessness).
 
2012-06-24 05:31:55 PM

Hector Remarkable: Stantz: I never wanted to the the pyramids anyway



[i229.photobucket.com image 300x300]


Good reference. Too spooky to get airplay?
 
2012-06-24 05:48:24 PM

MyEnamine: I for one welcome Egypt to the eighteenth century. In a couple hundred years and they can join us in the 21st. Baby steps, people. Baby steps.


The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood was founded in the early 20th Century and advocated democracy. It was the supposedly "modern" British who thought the Egyptian people would be better off under a king.
 
2012-06-24 06:00:56 PM
Religion-based government there: awesome.
Religion-based government here: worse than cancer.

You dems are effed up.
 
2012-06-24 06:06:33 PM

Flatus: Religion-based government there: awesome.
Religion-based government here: worse than cancer.

You dems are effed up.


1) secular and democratically elected party (awesome)
2) religious and democratically elected party (e.g., GOP or Freedom and Justice Party) pretty good
3) secular dictatorship (bad)
4) theocracy (very bad)

Egypt went from 3 to 2. Basically where the tea baggers would like the US to be.
 
2012-06-24 06:06:48 PM

Marine1: There's tons of everyone that think US law should be based on (insert something the rest of us don't want to live by here) . I just don't know any of these guys that supposedly make up the majority of Christians in this country. And if you guys do, let me know who it is, and as a Christian, I'll try to put them in their place. I mean, I'm a freakin' college student acting alone, but hey, it's worth a shot.

On the other point, again, tons of people want their beliefs (religious and otherwise) shoved into government. You have the Christian stuff listed earlier, then you have Jews wanting the Noahide laws recognized as the basis of our legal tradition, and the list goes on. There are probably atheists of the communist movement (however small) that want to see religion go the way of the dodo through government regulation.

Instead of saying shiat like "Xtian nutjobs", let's go with anyone anywhere who is a fundamentalist on anything. Religion, politics, economics, anything. I'm just tired of coming on here and reading the same crap parroted over and over from Richard Dawkins' talking points about how religion is dangerous and how Christians in the US are somehow supportive of religious fundamentalism in other countries. It's patently false. Find the guys that live sensibly and support them (Jew, Christian, Muslim, atheist, whatever) and tear down the guys who just can't get over differences with others.


I wanted to treat this statement fairly.. I really did. I cannot. You are correct that being a fundamentalist is the key point, there is such much evidence of fundamentalist thinking in the United States it is difficult to combat. Religion is dangerous. Historically and demonstrably evil. You are talking about a concept wherein the examination is given up because the answers are there. While I think personally you might be living am examined life, it is difficult for me to accept that you are not aware of or privvy to the evils of religion and how it moves the mind away from seeking truth. Christian or otherwise. We have to put all the false belief systems under the same lens of examination and reject all that is offered without evidence.

I'm not sure what you meant by this line: "There are probably atheists of the communist movement (however small) that want to see religion go the way of the dodo through government regulation."

That is not a 'small' amount. It is a huge amount historically. The early and mid 20th century was filled with examples of governments trying to stamp out religion.

The key thing I think I was bothered by in your post was this seemingly naive view that 'Radicalised Christians' or that 'Christian Ignorance' is a minority demographic. There are almost NO self professing Christians who live by even 1/10 of much of what the bible state. You must be aware of this. Surely you do not think that because someone declares themselves a Christian that they are, in fact, Christian. I certainly hope not, or I'm the King of England.

When you see ignorance. Fight it. Since you are a Christian, this truly is your fight. Be angry when people want to mix politics and religion. Be angry when a Christian is let go in a place where a Muslim is not. Be outraged everytime people use religion to sway votes. Be part of the solution, instead of justifying the problem.
 
2012-06-24 06:08:20 PM

Mrtraveler01
Gdalescrboz: Mrtraveler01

Gdalescrboz: Mrtraveler01
Gdalescrboz: Nogale

You really have to wonder about Muslims. They overthrow oppressive regimes - and vote in Islamists.

Now, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has made promises that it won't institute Sharia law, won't force women to cover their hair, etc. Did the Egyptian voters actually buy those promises?


Millions of you libs bought Obama's

I just voted for him because he wasn't a Republican to be honest.

After 8 years of Bush, I didn't think we needed 4 more years of Republican failure.

And you got 4/8 more years of Bush

Yeah, i should've voted for McCain. I mean he wouldn't have replicated the Bush years any better than Obama did right?

Let me guess, I should've voted for neo-confederate RON PAUL right?


Sure, i dont care. Anything not Republican/Dem main stream would be nice

Ah I see, you're one of those kind of voters. Not sure what we should vote for but not Obama and Romney.

You come back with someone better than Obama who is not Romney and then you might have something.


You already listed one person. Finding someone better than the people the Dems/Republicans are putting forth is like finding a chick with a black eye at a NASCAR race. But nooooo, you farkers cant seem to do it
 
2012-06-24 07:18:09 PM

EvilRacistNaziFascist: willyfreddy: [img41.imageshack.us image 499x171]

I don't have time to track down the reference myself, but when the uprising started I vividly recall the Muslim Brotherhood claiming that they have no intention of ever seeking power in Egypt. It would be awesome, and very educational, if someone could find that reference for us.

Not only that, but during the so-called "Arab Spring" various Farkers assured us that those concerned about the Muslim Brotherhood coming to power were merely pants- wetting, Fox- watching right- wing idiots, and that all Egyptians really wanted to do was harness the awesome power of social media to choose more freedoms for themselves.

The Left: getting sh*t wrong since 1917.


Well, I can only speak for myself, but I don't see accusing you of pants wetting about the MB getting power to be incomparable with them taking power.

Democratically elected muslims are democratically elected.
 
2012-06-24 07:40:53 PM

This Amp Goes To 11: dawnofdaycare: The Spinx and the the statues of the pharaohs are open for being destroyed now, just like like the Buddhist statues destroyed in Afghanistan. Sad.

Your understanding of middle east culture, politics and religion is pretty superficial if that's what you genuinely believe.


"A religiously motivated attack on statues at a museum in Cairo has sparked outcry in Egypt and fuelled fears that the country is veering towards an Islamic state.
The attack on three artworks, by a black-clad and veiled woman screaming, "Infidels, infidels!" followed a fatwa issued by the Grand Mufti of Cairo, Ali Gomaa, which banned all decorative statues of living beings."
 
2012-06-24 07:45:36 PM

steamingpile: cameroncrazy1984: steamingpile: And to the idiot above the Republicans doesnt want government based in Christian religion, especially the parts about taking away women's rights and killing gays.

I like this. You claim that Republicans aren't real Christians but the Muslim Brotherhood are representative of all Muslims.

No you need to read, we have seperation of church and state which is a good thing, they will be instituting Islamic beliefs in their laws. If you can't see that as a huge difference then you people are insane.

I guess it shouldn't surprise me that morons over here want to try and lump people you hate in with these guys to make conservatives look just as insane.


fromthebottomofthebarrel.files.wordpress.com

Golly gee, I wonder why people draw the comparison.
 
2012-06-24 08:50:50 PM

The Jami Turman Fan Club: The Muslim Brotherhood is an umbrella group. Tough to know what this election will mean for Egypt.


Yes... and for a group that originally promised they were not going to run a candidate in this election, they did a hell of a job winning this election, didn't they?
 
2012-06-24 09:21:14 PM
First non-military leader of Egypt?

faq.macedonia.org

EGYPT, I AM DISSAPOINT

/was Cleopatra a general?
 
2012-06-24 09:55:38 PM

PunGent: Aikidogamer: Mrtraveler01: You mean like a Parliamentary system? I'd love that too but I'm not holding my breath.

I know, right. Take heart in the fact many of the under 40 republicans care more about having a great economy than telling people what morals they should have. There is a tug of war in the party and if the more libertarian wing takes over govt will get cheaper and smaller.

Unfortunately, the money and numbers inside the current Republican party are running roughly 9 - 1 social conservative vs. fiscal conservative.

Just look at state and national Tea Party legislation to date: 9 parts pro-life, 1 part smaller government.


You do speak truth somewhat. It is more like 3-1 right now. The vocal derp masters of the Tea Party seem to get the most air time. Go figure. It is going to take a while. We wanted conservative and the last 3 guys who get the nod are Bush 2.0, McCain, and Rmoney...i mean Romney, no fiscal conservatives there. Democrats do not like Palin, neither to many Republicans, she makes us look stupid. She cannot even articulate half the time, and when she does it is ineffective. She is a bit like Shenia Twain, I like to look at her, but do not wish to hear her.
 
2012-06-25 12:03:38 AM
Strangeways here we come. The MB has enough enemies that it won't be long before some bigmouth strikes again. The destabilisation will be lud. Louder. Than. Bombs.
 
2012-06-25 12:13:49 AM

quickdraw: snocone: Some form of Christianity is in the genes

8/10 - youll get some bites for sure. The combination of science terms and Jesus talk is a nice touch.


Thought it might do better than this.
 
2012-06-25 04:57:30 AM
By "non-military" I guess that is the new word for "terrorist?"
 
2012-06-25 09:31:10 AM
Oh boy, just what the world need.... another death cult run country
 
2012-06-25 12:43:49 PM

Acharne: Marine1: There's tons of everyone that think US law should be based on (insert something the rest of us don't want to live by here) . I just don't know any of these guys that supposedly make up the majority of Christians in this country. And if you guys do, let me know who it is, and as a Christian, I'll try to put them in their place. I mean, I'm a freakin' college student acting alone, but hey, it's worth a shot.

On the other point, again, tons of people want their beliefs (religious and otherwise) shoved into government. You have the Christian stuff listed earlier, then you have Jews wanting the Noahide laws recognized as the basis of our legal tradition, and the list goes on. There are probably atheists of the communist movement (however small) that want to see religion go the way of the dodo through government regulation.

Instead of saying shiat like "Xtian nutjobs", let's go with anyone anywhere who is a fundamentalist on anything. Religion, politics, economics, anything. I'm just tired of coming on here and reading the same crap parroted over and over from Richard Dawkins' talking points about how religion is dangerous and how Christians in the US are somehow supportive of religious fundamentalism in other countries. It's patently false. Find the guys that live sensibly and support them (Jew, Christian, Muslim, atheist, whatever) and tear down the guys who just can't get over differences with others.

I wanted to treat this statement fairly.. I really did. I cannot. You are correct that being a fundamentalist is the key point, there is such much evidence of fundamentalist thinking in the United States it is difficult to combat. Religion is dangerous. Historically and demonstrably evil. You are talking about a concept wherein the examination is given up because the answers are there. While I think personally you might be living am examined life, it is difficult for me to accept that you are not aware of or privvy to the evils of religion and how it moves the ...


The problem I have with saying "religion is evil" is that it is an unqualified statement. A nun serving food to the hungry isn't evil. A bar mitzvah isn't evil... it's a young man being educated on responsibility and carrying on tradition. Hindus building beautiful temples isn't evil. What is evil is radical adherence to dogma. The Crusades, the recent Islamic jihad, the list goes on. Those things are evil, but they're not caused by faith. There was absolutely no faith in any of the Marxist-Leninist political movements of the 19th and 20th centuries, but these movements caused millions of deaths and destruction of priceless pieces of human legacy. That's why I reject the notion that religion is evil, because dogmatic fanaticism is a trait shared by nearly all schools of thought, religion included.

If everyone became godless tomorrow, we'd still have wars, prejudice, bigotry, and other problems. What's the old quote... "Religion is the only thing that can cause a good person to do bad things." It's utter crap. How many good working-class youths bought into the idea of communism because they wanted a working wage and equality? I'm sure more than a few. Things were fine to begin with, I'm sure. Then they were told by party leaders that they needed to make sure that others focused on state ideology as well. So they start burning books, tearing churches apart, arresting fellow citizens, and torturing people in political camps. What was a disadvantaged factory worker looking for a better tomorrow through socialism is now a raider destroying lives. Most never attended church after their interest in communism began.

Dawkins falls flat on this. His idea is that if you remove a cause of difference between humans (religion) and replace it with rational thinking, you get peace and understanding. This has been proven false time and time again, because when you remove one difference from humanity, you tend to see others crop up. The Sino-Soviet split is a classic example. Same goal: the people who do most of the hard, dangerous work in society (industrial laborers and peasants) get to control it. Then you get into details of how that's done, and people begin taking certain viewpoints as indisputable fact. Their views on what "rational" is become different. The result is that you have two groups fighting over something without any appeal to God or any higher power. During the 1960s, there was a time when more Soviet nuclear warheads were pointed at China than the US. No religion was present, no faith. There was a total commitment to "rationality" and scientific processes. The problem was, there's no universal definition of "rationality", so people keep killing each other anyways. Instead of accepting differences and moving on, we eliminate differences and find new ones to divide humanity.

We've come to a crossroads as a moral society. We can either reject radicalism and really solve problems, or we can use religion, class differences, philosophy, and the like as scapegoats for issues. I'd like to reject Christian radicalization. The "New Atheist" movement seems to embrace the radicalization of atheism. While the ideology is peaceful at the moment, we can't guarantee that it will stay that way when you have guys like Dawkins at the wheel, calling those with faith "diseased" and instructing people to disrespect others based on one premise (the inclusion of faith in thought) alone. I understand most non-believers aren't like this, but the trend is troubling from my side of the table.

I know Dawkins wasn't mentioned explicitly. I'm just bringing him up because we have this segment on Fark that believes in a "movement" that he "leads", and that movement holds that faith is inherently evil and that those who reject it seem to do no wrong. His thinking is central to this movement and gets parroted by tons of individuals. We saw that in this thread, and I'm tired of hearing it.
 
2012-06-25 01:36:59 PM
The only thing that will preserve human soceity is not religion, nor lack of it- it will be responsible population control and management of resources. The two go hand-in-hand- saying you're an environmentalist who doesn't believe in contraception is like saying you're in favour of due process of law with only the occasional lynching every other Saturday.
Many animals will stop breeding when population pressures grow too great. Humans are a glaring exception to this, and as a result we are poisoning our environment and depleting our resources at an alarming rate. In these conditions, war is essentially inevitable. Religion will just be another excuse.
 
2012-06-25 05:50:59 PM

beta_plus: First non-military leader of Egypt?

[faq.macedonia.org image 640x441]

EGYPT, I AM DISSAPOINT

/was Cleopatra a general?


She was a descendent in a line of Creole/Mestizo Military Governors.
 
2012-06-25 06:19:18 PM

Marine1: Acharne: Marine1: There's tons of everyone that think US law should be based on (insert something the rest of us don't want to live by here) . I just don't know any of these guys that supposedly make up the majority of Christians in this country. And if you guys do, let me know who it is, and as a Christian, I'll try to put them in their place. I mean, I'm a freakin' college student acting alone, but hey, it's worth a shot.

On the other point, again, tons of people want their beliefs (religious and otherwise) shoved into government. You have the Christian stuff listed earlier, then you have Jews wanting the Noahide laws recognized as the basis of our legal tradition, and the list goes on. There are probably atheists of the communist movement (however small) that want to see religion go the way of the dodo through government regulation.

Instead of saying shiat like "Xtian nutjobs", let's go with anyone anywhere who is a fundamentalist on anything. Religion, politics, economics, anything. I'm just tired of coming on here and reading the same crap parroted over and over from Richard Dawkins' talking points about how religion is dangerous and how Christians in the US are somehow supportive of religious fundamentalism in other countries. It's patently false. Find the guys that live sensibly and support them (Jew, Christian, Muslim, atheist, whatever) and tear down the guys who just can't get over differences with others.

I wanted to treat this statement fairly.. I really did. I cannot. You are correct that being a fundamentalist is the key point, there is such much evidence of fundamentalist thinking in the United States it is difficult to combat. Religion is dangerous. Historically and demonstrably evil. You are talking about a concept wherein the examination is given up because the answers are there. While I think personally you might be living am examined life, it is difficult for me to accept that you are not aware of or privvy to the evils of religion and how it ...


I see what you are saying. In effect you and I do the same things from opposite sides of faith. I do *not* tell religious people 'They' are evil, I explain how religious thinking can lead to evil actions. This, as you pointed out, is not unique to religion. I don't consider education children on multiculturalism to be religious, I'm just teaching them how to be tolerant. There is a sickening symptom amongst many young athiest that it is 'OK' to be bigoted towards the religious. This naturally solves nothing. The problems with it are obvious as there is a disconnect between what one is fighting against and what one causes as a result. I do and will freely and fairly combat many of the assumptions of religion. The whole idea that the world can be explained using no science, ancient texts and tradition is extremely offensive to the secular humanist. However, we cannot wins followers to our side by sticking our fingers in our ears.

I do not trust nor like religion. However I respect your take and I'll shake your hand.

As for Dawkins. I love the man, but he is just a man, and his arguments need the same sober examination as anyone else... that being said, I think it worrisome that you might reject someone in a debate because you consider yourself 'over Dawkins'. That person quoting Dawkins might still be making a valid point.
 
2012-06-26 06:07:05 PM

Marine1: PunGent: willyfreddy: [img41.imageshack.us image 499x171]

I don't have time to track down the reference myself, but when the uprising started I vividly recall the Muslim Brotherhood claiming that they have no intention of ever seeking power in Egypt. It would be awesome, and very educational, if someone could find that reference for us.

/shocked that the MB didn't follow through on their word
//not rly

Marine1: Mrtraveler01: Marine1: really, really wonder where all of these crazy creationist Christians are. I mean, according to Fark, I'm one. I am supposed to reject all reason, think that Jesus wanted America to nuke all non-believers (which would include the wonderful woman sitting next to me on the couch at this moment) and stone scientists to death for their blasphemy. I'm supposed to be living in the middle of "Jesus' 'Mericuh" where we all bomb abortion clinics and tell people they're going to hell for being gay. Again, I've never met any of these "nutjob Xtians" that supposedly work to make life miserable for the rest of you.

You live right down the road from Jefferson City and you're asking us this question?

Or do we need to propose a "don't say gay" bill in schools a second time and regulate strip clubs even further for you to realize these loons do exist.

/Disgruntled Missouri Christian

The strip club thing... yeah, but it's more or less offset by the fact that the stretch of interstate known as I-70 between KC and St. Louis is probably the most perverted highway in the country.

As for that dick representative, well, then a Catholic colleague of his came out as gay.

Like I hear about these guys in the news but the way it's said here on Fark (by what would appear to be a bunch of Dawkins acolytes) is that we're all here to impose Biblical law on the land and shiat. It's just not true. Hell, it even comes up in threads not even remotely related to conservative Christians in the US, like this one.

There are absolutely Christians who think US law sho ...


Yes, there are extremists in other religions, and in atheism, but atheists hold no power here in the US.

For Christian extremists, Google Chalcedon Foundation, that'll get ya started. And their politicians ABSOLUTELY affect our foreign policy, particularly in Israel. And you might also consider how the Prosperity Gospel folks contributed DIRECTLY to politicians who weakened our fiscal regulations before the current market blowout and recession.

Not to mention that I don't quite see how they get "material acquisition" to give with any part of Jesus' gospel, but that's on THEIR souls.

As for those who would deny separation of Church and State, I reply that it's good for both Church AND State; they would "elevate" church...notice how they assume it'll be THEIR church...to the status of the Post Office.
 
Displayed 35 of 285 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report