The truth is often unpopular.CanOfWhooppass wrote:If your so sure I'm the ignorant one, why don't you put a pole asking if your right on the money, making a reasonable argument or radical not worth arguing with? The fact that people give up trying to reason with you dosnt make you right.TROOPER wrote:That's not a voice of reason, that's a voice of abject ignorance. Just because there's two people saying at the same time doesn't make it more true, it just means there's more abject ignorance being spread.
Fortunately, the truth doesn't care.
Asking people if they THINK you're wrong is absurd, you're wrong because you are incorrect, not because enough people share a differing viewpoint.
The fact that I can't adequately educate you to sufficiently argue with you doesn't make me wrong, it just makes you ignorant.
But that's cool... F--k it, right? Dylann Roof was a gun-owner. Dylann Roof was bad. Ipso Facto, ALL gun-owners are bad.
You don't make even the shred of effort to differentiate between dramatically different religions, then wonder why I'm calling you ignorant? Is that so? Is that really so?
The original premise that I put forth is that religion - as a whole - isn't the problem. You disagree with this. You're wrong. You can disagree with a mathematical concept too, that doesn't make you correct. You can ask others' opinion on a mathematical concept, and that has nothing to do with the answer.
It isn't even that you're ignorant - which you are - it's that your ability to think rationally on this topic is so vigorously absent that it can't be anything other than willful.
What is religion? At its core it is just another form of government. It's a code of behavior which sets forth a system of actions and consequences. The fact that the consequences - good or bad - aren't tendered until after death is utterly irrelevant, because the fruits of that religion for society are the behaviors of its members here and now.
Examine analogous examples of your claim: democracy = constitutional republic = socialism = communism = dictator... because they're governments, and all government is the same.
The media does that to us all the damn time. I'm not surprised by this, because for one, I've found that leftists tend to be both dumber, in general... and agenda-driven, in particular. They gloss over the difference between me, as a gun-owner, versus Omar Mateen.
I usually expect better from this board, but you have disappointed, and continue to do so. It isn't even the degree to which you're wrong, it's the method by which you got there, and the additional methods you propose to defend that position.
A "pole"? What the hell would a poll prove? It isn't an opinion question.
A_Canadian.... ick set a trap for you, then you walked in to it. He probably should have explained that after the fact, but maybe he didn't because it could've come across as gloating, or maybe he just assumed you'd see it. He gives you more credit than you deserve, just like I give CanofWhoopass too much credit by assuming that he wouldn't turn around and over-simplify-and-pigeon-hole disparate groups of people after being on the receiving end of it from liberal Democrats.
--- ETA ---
"... all extremists are the same" Jesus.
What's an "Amish Extremist"? Someone who takes the Amish system of beliefs and values TOO far? So then what does that mean? He'd have NO contact with secular society? He'd eschew 'technology' from an earlier point? Perhaps no iron?
... and you think THAT is the same as a Muslim Extremist?
And what is a "radical"? Google says it is a synonym for "extreme". What is an "extreme" Christian? Someone who 'turns-the-other-cheek' to such a fault that under no circumstances would they defend themselves or their loved ones?
Compare that to a Muslim Extremist: visiting Imam to Orlando says that gays must die. This was TWO WEEKS before the shooting. You think this is an unrelated event? That Imam is a HEAD-OF-RELIGION for Islam.. the equivalent of a Bishop or a Cardinal. You don't see Bishops and Cardinals saying to kill gays. They say "love the sinner, hate the sin". They say that judgment comes in the afterlife... and we're not supposed to kill. But contrast that with Islam... Nope. Totally different. In Islam, if you die while killing infidels, you get virgins.
Which of those is compatible with a civilized society?
"All the same", you say. Go turn yourself in, Dylann Roof, because if they're all the same, then so are you.
And just to be clear: no where in here have I made a case that God is real or not. I have also quite bluntly agreed that not all - or even most - Muslims are bad. I have also been very clear when I said that Christianity isn't the end-all-be-all, or the moral best. My stance is simple: first, not all religions are the same. Religions can be - and often are - beneficial to society. Islam is not a good religion.
Three simple statements. Plenty of rational thought and well-articulated words to defend it.
Here's a thing which may seem unrelated, but it isn't. I have some co-workers that are gay... five, I think. Three males, and two females. I vastly prefer the company of the males, because while they may not be sexually interested in women, they certainly don't hate them. The two females, on the other hand, are sometimes hostile to males.
I'm reminded of that here, because in the attempts to defend atheism, there is a palpable sense of hatred for both religion in general, and Christianity in particular.
... and I still can't get passed the concept that a poll was even suggested.