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.

(Salon)   Wasn't Islam. Wasn't Islam. Wasn't Islam. ... Was Islam. That was easy   (salon.com) divider line 400
    More: Obvious, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, Islam, Dzhokhar, Tamerlan  
•       •       •

23917 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Apr 2013 at 10:10 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-23 12:24:58 PM

KellyX: What exactly is "energy independent"?

Does that really mean when we no longer need to use oil anymore?


A mix of lots of electric cars/hybrid and drilling at home. We also need to get Europe on the same bandwagon.

If you cut the oil money from the Middle-East, a lot of that shiat will die down.
 
2013-04-23 12:25:27 PM

Deep Contact: balthan: Ok, Islam is the problem.  Now what?  Given that freedom of religion is a Constitutionally protected right, what would you have the government do?

Any religion ending with an "m" is outlawed.


Like "Atheism"?
/ducks, runs away.
 
2013-04-23 12:26:00 PM

jso2897: Well, they are certainly more likely to be in a position to do something about it. What they are more likely to "embrace" is pure assumption on your part.


No it's not, there have been many many studies in many countries. The poorer and less educated tend to overwhelmingly reject violence and terrorism while the wealthy and educated embrace it fully.

Just look at the head echelon of Al Qaeda for fark's sake.
 
2013-04-23 12:26:29 PM

beanx: This is all because he was a boxer and suffered one too many concussii.

BAN BOXING!!!!!


If you don't think too many blows to the head can completely change someone into an insane motherfarker, you've forgotten about Chris Benoit.
 
2013-04-23 12:27:20 PM

jso2897: EWreckedSean: TrixieDelite: Diogenes:

Yes, terror is terror.  But how effectively are you "defending Islam" when the target and cause are so seemingly disconnected?  Not only were these punks bad terrorists (thank goodness) but they were poor representatives of their so-called cause.

That's my question. How are you "defending Islam" by bombing innocent people at the Boston Marathon?

By killing the unbelievers.

Late to the party, with old, tired shiat.
Get some fresh lines, dude.


Why do you think bombers do it genius? Hell the brother already said they let the guy go who they carjacked because he wasn't an American.
 
2013-04-23 12:28:29 PM

KellyX: EWreckedSean: Cell phones, iPads, McDonald's, pop music. Radicalization tends to die out when people are less miserable.

Guess that explains the two bombers...


Exceptions don't change the rule.
 
2013-04-23 12:29:09 PM

Tatsuma: EWreckedSean: Cell phones, iPads, McDonald's, pop music. Radicalization tends to die out when people are less miserable.

Except that the overwhelming majority of terrorists come from upper-middle-class or better backgrounds, with at the very least a college education.


Yeah, the easier their lives are and the more educated they are, the more Muslims are likely to embrace radical Islam and support terrorism. So your cultural imperialism is not going to work for shiat in that situation


Can you source that please?
 
2013-04-23 12:29:22 PM

ShadowKamui: jso2897: nmemkha: Meh. Come read up on the history of the Christian church.

Muslims have a LONG way to go to get to Crusades/Inquisition level atrocities.

Depends on how you measure atrocity. In terms of pure, deliberate cruelty, the Christians win. In terms of indiscriminate indifference to the fate of the innocent, I'd give it to Muslims. On the other hand, for pure efficiency of human slaughter, the modern political ideologies (fascism, communism)get the prize.
It's kind of a crappy contest, though, when you think about it.

The Mongols 'win' by a mile on the atrocity level pre-age of exploration, they actively carried out genocidal campaigns in northern china cause some princes stayed home instead of sending troops


images.wikia.com

/Would like a word...
 
2013-04-23 12:29:49 PM

jso2897: Deep Contact: balthan: Ok, Islam is the problem.  Now what?  Given that freedom of religion is a Constitutionally protected right, what would you have the government do?

Any religion ending with an "m" is outlawed.

Like "Atheism"?
/ducks, runs away.


Get back here!!
 
2013-04-23 12:30:41 PM

Tatsuma: KellyX: What exactly is "energy independent"?

Does that really mean when we no longer need to use oil anymore?

A mix of lots of electric cars/hybrid and drilling at home. We also need to get Europe on the same bandwagon.

If you cut the oil money from the Middle-East, a lot of that shiat will die down.


But it's all sold on the international market, even all the oil the US or the EU pumps up... It's not as if it's finders keepers going on.

Literally to be independent of Saudi/Middle Eastern oil we'd have to flat out stop using oil to the degree that it'd only be needed for stuff like lubrication (which we can make synthetics do better) or making plastics, thereby make the value go down so much that they'd not be getting as rich off it.
 
2013-04-23 12:31:17 PM

I_C_Weener: balthan: Ok, Islam is the problem.  Now what?  Given that freedom of religion is a Constitutionally protected right, what would you have the government do?

Not that it matters, but not all Constitutional rights are unregulated.  We don't let Mormons marry multiple women, or Aztecs sacrifice humans.  We probably shouldn't let Christians or Muslims kill people.


Which is already illegal.  And when the government has proof that people conspired with or supported others in killingl, they get charged too.

Yes, religious extremists killing people is bad.  In a free society, what are we suppose to do to prevent it?
 
2013-04-23 12:31:21 PM

Resident Muslim: I've actually found Fark to be well-knowledged about Islam, with many non-Muslims (atheists, agnostics, Christians and Jews etc) dispelling many myths, and I personally thank them or that.
I know there are trolls here.


Im sorry but I respectfully disagree with you. I have studied Mohammed, the Koran and the Hadiths extensively and your cherry picking of a couple verses is just as bad as a Christian cherry picking verses from the Bible to make a point. The Koran, Hadiths and history all come together to provide context to what the texts mean. I do not speak Arabic so my views are not given any weight by serious scholars of Islam of course but the translations, in the real world, give a pretty good insight into what Islam is and what it wants to be. Mohammed is the highest prophet of Allah and as such what he says and what he did goes.
 
2013-04-23 12:31:37 PM

Tatsuma: jso2897: Well, they are certainly more likely to be in a position to do something about it. What they are more likely to "embrace" is pure assumption on your part.

No it's not, there have been many many studies in many countries. The poorer and less educated tend to overwhelmingly reject violence and terrorism while the wealthy and educated embrace it fully.

Just look at the head echelon of Al Qaeda for fark's sake.


Again - we see those who have the tools to act on what they believe - we don't see those who don't -at least not here in the West, where it takes money to operate.
 I have not seen any of these "studies" you calim to exist, and I doubt that they do, at least not from credible sources. Once again, you are citing your own opinionated assumptions as facts.
 
2013-04-23 12:33:38 PM

Kentucky Fried Panda: thunderbird8804: We are at war, to digress briefly, with Islamic fundamentalism modern Islam, which tends to breed fundamentalists.

/That should cover roughly half the thread


Old Islam is pretty horrendous too, though its fusion with National Socialist and Fascist ideology after WWII certainly didn't help.
 
2013-04-23 12:34:18 PM

EWreckedSean: Can you source that please?


Sure

http://www.american.com/archive/2007/november-december-magazine-cont en ts/what-makes-a-terrorist
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/bruce-hoffman/todays-highly-educate d- terrorists-4080
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/magazine/12FOB-IdeaLab-t.html?scp= 1& sq=Berreby&st=cse
http://www.nber.org/digest/sep02/w9074.html

and the list goes on and on and on. It's a myth that getting them out of poverty, and giving them access to comfortable lifestyles and education will curb terrorism. The answer lies elsewhere.

By the way in Canada yesterday they arrested two Al Qaeda members for planning a terrorist attack. One of them was once again an engineer with many many diplomas
 
2013-04-23 12:34:47 PM
How many people that post here were raped by priests?
Show of hands please?

/This may answer some questions.
 
2013-04-23 12:36:39 PM
i35.tinypic.com

I'm pretty sure he's one of the Jonas brothers.
 
2013-04-23 12:37:09 PM

Tatsuma: KellyX: Ok ok ok... Don't ignore radical islam...

What is the solution then?

*sigh*

That's the hard part, isn't it?


Well, we could try and export democracy and the idea of secular self-rule, but it turns out, that's part of the reason radicalization happens. And even if that does take hold, the people tend to elect people friendly with hardliners.

We could try armed occupation, but let's not. It has been a rough decade for that.

We could try overthrowing leadership and replacing them with who we think will be dedicated to governance, as opposed to rule - but again, this has historically not worked out awesomely for all involved.

We could leave them alone, but that's a bit callous and doesn't really solve the problem for people currently living there.

So you see, the dilemma is something of an oscillation among those positions, and no one of them has borne any better fruit than the previous attempt(s). You can see why there's sudden interest in not "solving the underlying problem" and only dealing with its consequences.

In America, all we can really do is fight extremism where we see it. When we start thinking outside our borders is when shiat goes to fark at light speed.
 
2013-04-23 12:37:12 PM

Tatsuma: EWreckedSean: Can you source that please?

Sure

http://www.american.com/archive/2007/november-december-magazine-cont en ts/what-makes-a-terrorist
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/bruce-hoffman/todays-highly-educate d- terrorists-4080
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/magazine/12FOB-IdeaLab-t.html?scp= 1& sq=Berreby&st=cse
http://www.nber.org/digest/sep02/w9074.html

and the list goes on and on and on. It's a myth that getting them out of poverty, and giving them access to comfortable lifestyles and education will curb terrorism. The answer lies elsewhere.

By the way in Canada yesterday they arrested two Al Qaeda members for planning a terrorist attack. One of them was once again an engineer with many many diplomas


Those "studies" are all about terrorists who make it to the West to do their deeds - a tiny fraction of terrorists as a whole. Of course those terrorists have money and skills - they couldn't operate outside the third world if they didn't. They represent a tiny fraction of radical Islam.
 
2013-04-23 12:38:03 PM

Itstoearly:
Or Fark, when talking about Republicans or Christians?


Any group, that's sort of my point. Republicans, Democrats, Iberia Airline pilots, anyone who can identify a solid "us" and "them" and knows in their heart that WE are right, and THEY are wrong, and every single thing they see just gets their blood boiling about how bad THEY are. It doesn't USUALLY escalate to violence, normally it manifests itself in various derp and whargarbl, but now and then someone, probably someone about half crazy to begin with, gets the idea to build a bomb, or shoot up a place, or whatever.
 
2013-04-23 12:38:32 PM

Tatsuma: Al Qaeda members


That may be a bit of a reach.  Sympathizers, yes.  Members, really?
 
2013-04-23 12:40:41 PM

Dr Dreidel: Tatsuma: KellyX: Ok ok ok... Don't ignore radical islam...

What is the solution then?

*sigh*

That's the hard part, isn't it?

Well, we could try and export democracy and the idea of secular self-rule, but it turns out, that's part of the reason radicalization happens. And even if that does take hold, the people tend to elect people friendly with hardliners.

We could try armed occupation, but let's not. It has been a rough decade for that.

We could try overthrowing leadership and replacing them with who we think will be dedicated to governance, as opposed to rule - but again, this has historically not worked out awesomely for all involved.

We could leave them alone, but that's a bit callous and doesn't really solve the problem for people currently living there.

So you see, the dilemma is something of an oscillation among those positions, and no one of them has borne any better fruit than the previous attempt(s). You can see why there's sudden interest in not "solving the underlying problem" and only dealing with its consequences.

In America, all we can really do is fight extremism where we see it. When we start thinking outside our borders is when shiat goes to fark at light speed.


This - "terrorism" is a reality of modern life, and all we can do is minimize the already miniscule risk it poses to us. If all radical Islam vanished tomorrow, by magic - we would still have "terrorism" aplenty. But it is about as likely to harm any of us as lighting strikes - find something else to piss and moan about.
 
2013-04-23 12:41:15 PM

jso2897: Those "studies" are all about terrorists who make it to the West to do their deeds - a tiny fraction of terrorists as a whole. Of course those terrorists have money and skills - they couldn't operate outside the third world if they didn't. They represent a tiny fraction of radical Islam.


The same is true in Pakistan and Afghanistan as well.

This is not an old concept, I believe Aristotle himself said that only a wealthy land-owning man could be a philosopher because he's the only one who has time to sit and think in the first place.
 
2013-04-23 12:41:41 PM

corronchilejano: I'm sorry but how is a casserole a weapon of mass destruction?


It's made out of Taco Bell leftovers and cocaine.
 
2013-04-23 12:41:59 PM
Tatsuma:  4 out of 5 Al Qaeda victims are Muslims. Yes, even including the thousands who died at the World Trade Center.

In fact by on killing non-Muslims they went against the grain of their organization.


I don't think this gets emphasized enough.
 
2013-04-23 12:42:02 PM

Kentucky Fried Panda: That may be a bit of a reach. Sympathizers, yes. Members, really?


The RCMP said that they were in constant contact and being directed by Al Qaeda elements in Iran.

If being in constant contact and being directed is not being a member, what is?
 
2013-04-23 12:42:31 PM

EWreckedSean: How often do we hear Muslim leaders calling for jihad?


Well? And what's the percentage of the overall Saturday Mornin' Imams doing it worldwide, considering there's a billion or so Muslins out there.

I'll tell you this much: Back in my Christian days I attended a fairly large (for Metro DC) Episcopal church. This church was attended by many of the flunkies of the George W Bush administration. W'd just taken office when I was attending this church. The church grew more "Dominionist", with the pastor, previously a very reasonable, thoughtful guy, saying that as Christians in the Federal Government, we should be guided by the Holy Spirit to bring about God's Law for America. For how can God bless America if we allow the Fed to approve Teh Ghey, Abortions, Evolutions, all that paganny kind of heathen savagery.

This was not some podunk uncle-humper church in the backwoods. This was not some remote congregation of 6 people meeting in some prairie tool shed under the leadership of a self-ordained Evangelical Minister. This was a well-heeled Episcopal church inside the Beltway, not 10 miles from Homeland's Capitol Building. Admonishing believers to put Conservative Christian, "Bible-based" principles before the Constitution, in order to gain the blessing of Christian BibleGod.

Granted, there was no talk of killing anyone or blowing up buildings, but the end result of undermining the Constitution of the United States, a secular institution, and replacing it with a theocracy remained the same.
 
2013-04-23 12:43:03 PM
Be thankful the bombers were not connected to the Tea Party. Can you imagine all the people blathering on about how they were extremists and not representative of Tea Party values?

Then, they'd probably be rolling out charts and such on all the acts of terror committed by Muslims, as though that somehow justified or excused the Boston Tea Party bombings.

We dodged one there, folks.
 
2013-04-23 12:43:08 PM

enik: bluefox3681: But before we caught them, I remember a salon.com article just hoping that is wasn't muslims.
And then after we caught them, I remember msnbc doing their best to not mention Islam and comparing these guys to the columbine shooters.

Why all the covering for Islam?  Yes, all terrorists are not muslim and all muslims are not terrorists.  However, let's stop going out of our way to make excuses for any extreme ideology.

Because only Christians, whites and gun owners can be denigrated by the media. It's in their handbook.


Let Jesus have a turn at the cross! You are spending too much time on it!
 
2013-04-23 12:43:46 PM

bluefox3681: Hickory-smoked: bluefox3681: But before we caught them, I remember a salon.com article just hoping that is wasn't muslims.
And then after we caught them, I remember msnbc doing their best to not mention Islam and comparing these guys to the columbine shooters.

Why all the covering for Islam?  Yes, all terrorists are not muslim and all muslims are not terrorists.  However, let's stop going out of our way to make excuses for any extreme ideology.

But that's just it. It's not an "extreme ideology" anymore than Christianity or Hinduism are. It's a wide range of sects, cultural groups and individuals which include more than a few total dicks.

Most Americans still don't know anything about Muslims aside from news stories like this and what they're told by Nationalistic websites. Ask any Islamic American who was here at the time how their lives were changed by 9/11, and you would have been praying Boston was unrelated too.

Oh please.  We don't have to try and find an equivalent evil in every culture as if that makes it all ok and equal.  7% of American muslims think that suicide bombings are justified.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/30/muslim-american-moderate-vi ew -survey_n_942555.html

Why don't we have more hand wringing about the 200,000 muslims in this country that are probably radicalized?


Just for context, here's the paragraph you're referring to:

As in 2007, very few Muslim Americans - just 1% - say that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets are often justified to defend Islam from its enemies; an additional 7% say suicide bombings are sometimes justified in these circumstances. Fully 81% say that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilians are never justified.

Personally, I wonder if phrased the same way there wouldn't be 7% of Christians who give similar answers if they thought Christianity was being attacked... but that wasn't my point. The point is we should ask if the potential for militancy has more to do with the basic tenets of a religion, or current global politics. I think the latter is more likely, and handwringing about Muslims and racially profiling them isn't likely to help that.
 
2013-04-23 12:45:01 PM
I blame the subliminal messages in Rock and Roll.
 
2013-04-23 12:45:07 PM

Bondith: Resident Muslim: The question then remains of where do you draw the line? The Islamic scholars differ in this, an luckily enough in mainstream Islam you do not have one governing body, not even the Muftis* of Saudi Arabia, so you have the option of listening to different religious viewpoints a making a conscious decision which makes sense to you**, or if they all make sense (or all don't) people usually adopt the viewpoint of the scholar they've felt comfortable with before in terms of how he thinks.

So you're encouraged to engage your brain and do some common-sense thinking?  I may have to revise my previous statement.


First of all, hats off for having an open mind and being open to differing viewpoints.

I really believe that Islam is based on common sense. Based on logic. Questioning your faith is a good thing when you find out that you are getting answers.

I know that this is Fark, and people are already typing invisible-sky-wizard as I type, that religion is NOT common sense.
However when you see all the SCIENTIFIC thing that had to come together for life to exist on this planet it is nothing but miraculous, mind-blowing if you will. Watch the discovery channel or any science channel and chances are that in any 24 hour period you'd hear the phrase "and if it wasn't for ____ life wouldn't be able to exist on earth" (granted, maybe "life as we know it, but I'll rephrase that to YOU wouldn't exist on earth).
Examples:
-oxygen being heavier than other gases so we can breathe
-UV/sunbursts getting deflected from earth or absorbed
-meteors burning up in the atmosphere
-water being the only thing that expands when it freezes, (I think) therefore it floats and protects the animals underneath thereby sustaining life

I know there are many people who scoff at 'intelligent design' but at what point do you go "hmm, this is kinda fishy..."

I'm sure any more knowledgable resident scientist/doctor on Fark can give even more examples whether or not they are religious.

/ps if you think old wisdom/science in the pyramids freaky, google science + Quran
//sorry for the double posts, on mobile (and still typing out a bunch of stuff, so sorry)
///slash my heart
 
2013-04-23 12:45:08 PM

Tatsuma: Kentucky Fried Panda: That may be a bit of a reach. Sympathizers, yes. Members, really?

The RCMP said that they were in constant contact and being directed by Al Qaeda elements in Iran.

If being in constant contact and being directed is not being a member, what is?


Well, they obviously were not at the weekly Al Qaeda meetings....  Sort of far from the flagpole, don't ya think?  Which, I believe is more concerning....
 
2013-04-23 12:45:10 PM

Tatsuma: jso2897: Those "studies" are all about terrorists who make it to the West to do their deeds - a tiny fraction of terrorists as a whole. Of course those terrorists have money and skills - they couldn't operate outside the third world if they didn't. They represent a tiny fraction of radical Islam.

The same is true in Pakistan and Afghanistan as well.

This is not an old concept, I believe Aristotle himself said that only a wealthy land-owning man could be a philosopher because he's the only one who has time to sit and think in the first place.


Well, I'll grant you the obvious - a bloody-minded lunatic with money is more dangerous than one without it.
And we can't count on affluence to fix everything wrong with the human soul either - if we could, Paris Hilton and Kim Kardassian would be great spiritual and philosophical leaders, and Donald Trump a great statesman.
 
2013-04-23 12:48:16 PM
doubled99:
A) Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it
B) History always repeats itself.

C) No one learns anything, ever.

D) Profit??

D) Prophet??
 
2013-04-23 12:52:08 PM
Personally I was hoping from the start it was Islam, but not as anything against Islam. I just didn't want to have the media create yet another new bogeyman under the bed.
 
2013-04-23 12:54:03 PM

mamoru: Yeah, but based on this summary of a few sources (specifically cites NPR and the WSJ), the brother basically was to mainstream Islam what Westboro Baptist is to mainstream Christianity.


What exactly is "mainstream Christianity"?  There may have been a time when "mainstream" Christianity in the USA was something that didn't conflict with the empirical sciences, didn't affect your life much from Monday through Saturday, had no issues with church-state separation, and wasn't taken very seriously even by many of its ostensible members, but that is not the case now.  Whether the religious right are a numerical majority of Christians or not, they are the ones that "count" as far as trashing our educational system and controlling one of our country's two political parties.  Similarly, it is the violent Muslims who "count" irregardless of how many laid back, whishy-washy Muslims may also exist.
 
2013-04-23 12:54:13 PM
Man, Christians are really falling down on the job of committing atrocities. I mean, Fark clearly demonstrates every few days that Christians are just as bad as Muslims and are just as likely to kill innocents at any moment. But for decades lazy Christians have generally failed to live up to their mandate to terrorize civilizations the world over. Yeah, there were nine abortion clinic attacks over 20 years, but that's really not good enough, Christians. Come on, step up your game! Make with the horror and bloodshed!
 
2013-04-23 12:56:54 PM

Magorn: I'm going to go out on a limb an guess you aren't Fluent in writtern Arabic, which tells me you have never read the Koran.



I don't know Aramaic, Greek, or Hebrew, so does that mean I can't ever read a Bible?
 
2013-04-23 12:57:14 PM

flondrix: mamoru: Yeah, but based on this summary of a few sources (specifically cites NPR and the WSJ), the brother basically was to mainstream Islam what Westboro Baptist is to mainstream Christianity.

What exactly is "mainstream Christianity"?  There may have been a time when "mainstream" Christianity in the USA was something that didn't conflict with the empirical sciences, didn't affect your life much from Monday through Saturday, had no issues with church-state separation, and wasn't taken very seriously even by many of its ostensible members, but that is not the case now.  Whether the religious right are a numerical majority of Christians or not, they are the ones that "count" as far as trashing our educational system and controlling one of our country's two political parties.  Similarly, it is the violent Muslims who "count" irregardless of how many laid back, whishy-washy Muslims may also exist.


Did you actually write "irregardless"?
 
2013-04-23 01:02:35 PM

flondrix: mamoru: Yeah, but based on this summary of a few sources (specifically cites NPR and the WSJ), the brother basically was to mainstream Islam what Westboro Baptist is to mainstream Christianity.

What exactly is "mainstream Christianity"?  There may have been a time when "mainstream" Christianity in the USA was something that didn't conflict with the empirical sciences, didn't affect your life much from Monday through Saturday, had no issues with church-state separation, and wasn't taken very seriously even by many of its ostensible members, but that is not the case now.  Whether the religious right are a numerical majority of Christians or not, they are the ones that "count" as far as trashing our educational system and controlling one of our country's two political parties.  Similarly, it is the violent Muslims who "count" irregardless of how many laid back, whishy-washy Muslims may also exist.


I find it funny that when it comes to religion, the minority represents the majority and yet when it comes to virtually anything else, especially race, any sort of sample group even the majority does not represent the whole. Even funnier than that is you have people claiming Christianity is all that is wrong with America citing Westboro etc. as representative of the "mainstream", and yet chastising people for claiming Islam is a violent religion due to the actions of a select group of individuals.
 
2013-04-23 01:04:29 PM

FlashHarry: PC LOAD LETTER: Actually, most terrorists are environmental activists, according to the FBI

Z1P2: Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslim.

BZZZT you're both wrong. most domestic terrorists - the ones who actually harm or kill other americans - are of the right wing variety.


Ran a percentage on the 46 cases of radical Islamic terror events in your cited article, vs. the 275 cases of right-wing terror events.  Then referenced this  http://www.alternet.org/story/149561/americans_are_far_less_conservat i ve_than_the_right_wing_claims article to extrapolate a fairly correct number of "right-wingers, placing right-wingers at 32,760,000 of the American population vs. 2,6000,000 Muslims in America, figure lifted from this  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2138365/The-changing-face-rel i gious-America-Number-Muslims-U-S-doubles-9-11-Mormonism-spreads-East-C oast.html article.

Interestingly, the percentages of attacks relative to populations are not too totally different.  For right-wingers, the attack percentage is 0000083% of population, vs. Muslim attack percentage of 000017.6% of population.

Right-wingers not quite as nasty as Islamists, statistically, in the number of douchebags (there's an extra zero for right-wingers,right thar in the calculations), but I'm comforted to see all the zeros in front of each percentage.

Time for lunch. DON'T PANIC. Terrists NOT errywhere...
 
2013-04-23 01:04:30 PM

Contrabulous Flabtraption: Man, Christians are really falling down on the job of committing atrocities. I mean, Fark clearly demonstrates every few days that Christians are just as bad as Muslims and are just as likely to kill innocents at any moment. But for decades lazy Christians have generally failed to live up to their mandate to terrorize civilizations the world over. Yeah, there were nine abortion clinic attacks over 20 years, but that's really not good enough, Christians. Come on, step up your game! Make with the horror and bloodshed!


When you have pointless discussions about things that don't matter, you are free to evaluate them from any perspective you wish. Human beings are emotionally very bad at risk assessment, and spend a lot of time wringing their hands about things that don't really matter very much.
 
2013-04-23 01:06:11 PM

Draskuul: Personally I was hoping from the start it was Islam, but not as anything against Islam. I just didn't want to have the media create yet another new bogeyman under the bed.


I thought it was Muslim extremists at the start, though the tea party idea made some sense at the time.

backing up a bit...
as a Catholic, I disagree with some people on death penalty (we shouldn't have such a thing), and others on abortion (fetal viability definition is so arbitrary, why not leave infants to die also? they are parasitic, so why only embrace one vile practice?).

the child abuse issue leaves a black mark on us all, as Catholics. I didn't abuse any kids, but you wonder what you would have done, had you known. it is a strain that won't disappear, and why should people think otherwise?

I think this radical terrorism may be a similar black mark on all of Islam. it's as much of the common knowledge of Islam as anything else anyone knows about Islam, just as any Catholic thing here is about child rape. the stain does not go away so easily.

you prove it every day, I guess. there is no easy way to take off the black mark. just prove it every day.

/ okay, back to my regular trolling
 
2013-04-23 01:07:15 PM

give me doughnuts: I don't know Aramaic, Greek, or Hebrew, so does that mean I can't ever read a Bible?


Properly read the Hebrew Bible? Not really, no. Certainly not with a mere translation, at the very least.

If you get a commentary like the Artscroll Chumash or with Rashi, you'll be close, but that's only the first five books.

If you really wanted to read the whole thing and understand what it says, you would need to buy something like this:

i.imgur.com

That'd be nearly 30 books to cover everything after the 5 books of Moses.

/They don't call us 'People of the Books' for nothing
 
2013-04-23 01:08:14 PM

the money is in the banana stand: flondrix: mamoru: Yeah, but based on this summary of a few sources (specifically cites NPR and the WSJ), the brother basically was to mainstream Islam what Westboro Baptist is to mainstream Christianity.

What exactly is "mainstream Christianity"?  There may have been a time when "mainstream" Christianity in the USA was something that didn't conflict with the empirical sciences, didn't affect your life much from Monday through Saturday, had no issues with church-state separation, and wasn't taken very seriously even by many of its ostensible members, but that is not the case now.  Whether the religious right are a numerical majority of Christians or not, they are the ones that "count" as far as trashing our educational system and controlling one of our country's two political parties.  Similarly, it is the violent Muslims who "count" irregardless of how many laid back, whishy-washy Muslims may also exist.

I find it funny that when it comes to religion, the minority represents the majority and yet when it comes to virtually anything else, especially race, any sort of sample group even the majority does not represent the whole. Even funnier than that is you have people claiming Christianity is all that is wrong with America citing Westboro etc. as representative of the "mainstream", and yet chastising people for claiming Islam is a violent religion due to the actions of a select group of individuals.


Bigotry of any kind is "barnyard collectivism" - you can't expect intellectual consistency from those who advocate it.
 
2013-04-23 01:12:50 PM

give me doughnuts: Magorn: I'm going to go out on a limb an guess you aren't Fluent in writtern Arabic, which tells me you have never read the Koran.


I don't know Aramaic, Greek, or Hebrew, so does that mean I can't ever read a Bible?


well, the Koran is the literal Word of God, for believers.

a benefit of xian reformation was scripture in vernacular, so that those who could not read Latin could still read valid scripture in the common tongue.

part of the terrorism issue is literacy amongst Muslims, but scripture was only one part of the reformation.
 
2013-04-23 01:14:17 PM

Hickory-smoked: The point is we should ask if the potential for militancy has more to do with the basic tenets of a religion, or current global politics. I think the latter is more likely, and handwringing about Muslims and racially profiling them isn't likely to help that.


I'm guessing you think the tenets have nothing to do with the potential for militancy?  I also guess that it doesn't alarm you that the world's 1.6 billion Muslims have produced only two Nobel laureates in chemistry and physics; the worlds Jews, one hundred times less numerous, have produced 79.  Some of us think that the religious faith itself, or at least it's leadership, might have a bearing on behavior.  According to the Economist magazine,  the Saudi government supports books for Islamic schools such as "The Unchallengeable Miracles of the Qur'an: The Facts That Can't Be Denied By Science" suggesting an inherent conflict between belief and reason.

I know, I know, you'll say Christian fundies just as bad, and I'll say no they're not.
 
2013-04-23 01:14:35 PM

jso2897: Bigotry of any kind is "barnyard collectivism"


Can you dumb this down for me?  I'm not tracking....
 
2013-04-23 01:15:17 PM

Bith Set Me Up: Did you actually write "irregardless"?


Whether you use "regardless" or "irregardless", there will always be someone eager to point out why you should use the other one.
 
Displayed 50 of 400 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report