This topic is locked from further discussion.
yea this is something i dont like about modern religions. It;s not fair how they can become all 'modernized' and what not. If your Jewish or Christian or Muslim, by god you should be following that book to the bone, stone who needs to be stoned and behead who needs to be beheaded. You cant have it both ways.[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="Ilovegames1992"]
Christianity lost its balls recently in history. Islam seems to have kept its morals and stubborness. Good for them.
Christianity just bends over and takes it up the arse now.
ShadowMoses900
It's called context and understanding certain aspects and cultures at the time. For instance take the Constitution, it defines all men as free but yet the original document allowed slavery, surely you and several others look at the Constitution as the basis of where human rights come from, the value of the document. But surely you are against slavery, so how can this be if you believe in the Constitution then?
Context, see. Obvioulsy it was a different time period, it didn't make slavery right, it never was, but that doesn't change the fundamental values of the Constitution which is freedom. The Torah, The Bible, and Koran are the same way. The context and certain elements may not be right or only make sense within the context of that time and culture, but the fundamental values and message are still legit.
that post was sort of tongue in cheekYou've got the name right. Application has been sent in. Approval is pending. I figure if I can get the almighty on my side it might expedite the approval process.nocoolnamejimWhat's this about Chili Dragon and an application being sent in? This sounds very interesting, is it a secret? :o
[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]yea this is something i dont like about modern religions. It;s not fair how they can become all 'modernized' and what not. If your Jewish or Christian or Muslim, by god you should be following that book to the bone, stone who needs to be stoned and behead who needs to be beheaded. You cant have it both ways. BossPerson
It's called context and understanding certain aspects and cultures at the time. For instance take the Constitution, it defines all men as free but yet the original document allowed slavery, surely you and several others look at the Constitution as the basis of where human rights come from, the value of the document. But surely you are against slavery, so how can this be if you believe in the Constitution then?
Context, see. Obvioulsy it was a different time period, it didn't make slavery right, it never was, but that doesn't change the fundamental values of the Constitution which is freedom. The Torah, The Bible, and Koran are the same way. The context and certain elements may not be right or only make sense within the context of that time and culture, but the fundamental values and message are still legit.
that post was sort of tongue in cheekWell still felt it was worth explaining. I like talking to you, you're much more respectful when it comes to religious discussions than a lot of the posters here.
[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"]You've got the name right. Application has been sent in. Approval is pending. I figure if I can get the almighty on my side it might expedite the approval process.Toph_Girl250What's this about Chili Dragon and an application being sent in? This sounds very interesting, is it a secret? :o ChiliDragon is the username of both a fellow moderator here on GS and my offline wife. My application is joking with LJS that she hasn't APPROVED my getting a harem yet but I'm still trying to convince her to let me have one. Have even offered her the position of "Most Favored Wife" that she can lord over the harem. She's understandably skeptical.
Christianity does, but it doesn't matter because the religion itself is still backwards, it's just the people are chaning what the religion actually is.
that post was sort of tongue in cheek[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]
It's called context and understanding certain aspects and cultures at the time. For instance take the Constitution, it defines all men as free but yet the original document allowed slavery, surely you and several others look at the Constitution as the basis of where human rights come from, the value of the document. But surely you are against slavery, so how can this be if you believe in the Constitution then?
Context, see. Obvioulsy it was a different time period, it didn't make slavery right, it never was, but that doesn't change the fundamental values of the Constitution which is freedom. The Torah, The Bible, and Koran are the same way. The context and certain elements may not be right or only make sense within the context of that time and culture, but the fundamental values and message are still legit.
ShadowMoses900
Well still felt it was worth explaining. I like talking to you, you're much more respectful when it comes to religious discussions than a lot of the posters here.
thanks, i try to keep things civilSo people think that Christianity is losing its iage over time and Islam is not for better or worse? Indeed. However, that is mostly the U.S.'s fault, it's the main area where parts of the bible are being ignored or changed to allow certain things in (like homosexuals), while places like EU are more devoted religious, and have the Pope somewhere over there.FreddyJeffery
My favourite part of any post i've read in a while.
Pope recently did a tour of the UK as well.
Legend.
[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]Darkman would make a great political analyst of commentator. Nobody could accuse him of bias since nobody knows what his real opinions are. His analyses are spot on though. BossPersonI'd hangout with Darkman, that is a lot coming from a Palestinianme, you major, darkman and piejunior. well have shawarmas once peace is made. Falafel and Humus for breakfast, Shawarma for lunch, manaqeesh za3tar for dinner. It has been decided :3
[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="GazaAli"] I'd hangout with Darkman, that is a lot coming from a PalestinianGazaAlime, you major, darkman and piejunior. well have shawarmas once peace is made. Falafel and Humus for breakfast, Shawarma for lunch, manaqeesh za3tar for dinner. It has been decided :3
I want a falafel :(
What statement? The thread is in the forum of a question which has led to discussion. What is a direct question/TC, if you're gonna make some sort of a statement, take a more direct approach.
one_plum
[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]Darkman would make a great political analyst of commentator. Nobody could accuse him of bias since nobody knows what his real opinions are. His analyses are spot on though. BossPersonI'd hangout with Darkman, that is a lot coming from a Palestinianme, you major, darkman and piejunior. well have shawarmas once peace is made. Got a question for you group then. Why hasn't anyone tried a "Marshall Plan" approach to Palestine? (Or if they have, can someone give me some reading material?) I'm referring to how the allies went in and basically rebuild the Axis power nations after WWII when they figured out that leaving them in ruins after WW1 went a long way towards causing WW2. Then, over time, clear benchmarks were set that the Axis powers needed to meet to gradually get independence again. Palestine, as I understand it, is kept under pretty much constant poverty, sanctions, etc. Doesn't this cause an endless loop? Why not just go in and kill the extremists with kindness to strengthen the moderates? /hippie
Falafel and Humus for breakfast, Shawarma for lunch, manaqeesh za3tar for dinner. It has been decided :3[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]me, you major, darkman and piejunior. well have shawarmas once peace is made. wis3boi
I want a falafel :(
You are a wise man[QUOTE="BossPerson"][QUOTE="GazaAli"] I'd hangout with Darkman, that is a lot coming from a Palestiniannocoolnamejimme, you major, darkman and piejunior. well have shawarmas once peace is made. Got a question for you group then. Why hasn't anyone tried a "Marshall Plan" approach to Palestine? (Or if they have, can someone give me some reading material?) I'm referring to how the allies went in and basically rebuild the Axis power nations after WWII when they figured out that leaving them in ruins after WW1 went a long way towards causing WW2. Then, over time, clear benchmarks were set that the Axis powers needed to meet to gradually get independence again. Palestine, as I understand it, is kept under pretty much constant poverty, sanctions, etc. Doesn't this cause an endless loop? Why not just go in and kill the extremists with kindness to strengthen the moderates? /hippieI sometimes wonder this as well. The Israeli right should realize how dangerous their policies are.
although that doesnt automatically equal appeasing Hamas.
It's just an acknwlodgement that its better to remove a threat instead of farming one.
I know mods are posters too, but i feel uneasy about a moderator, and representative of a site, being openly insulting and disrepespectful to a religion.
[QUOTE="GazaAli"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]me, you major, darkman and piejunior. well have shawarmas once peace is made. BossPersonFalafel and Humus for breakfast, Shawarma for lunch, manaqeesh za3tar for dinner. It has been decided :3zaatar? jibneh man. Best breakfast possible. With some tea as well. Jibneh I'm with you, just wanted to make it more authentic. Also Darkman is not a fan of Shawarma I'm disappointing. This is probably why peace is still not achieved... I'm of to bed, explain to Jim whatever he's asking about, was supposed to go to sleep an hour ago but this topic kept me up...
[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]me, you major, darkman and piejunior. well have shawarmas once peace is made. Darkman2007Got a question for you group then. Why hasn't anyone tried a "Marshall Plan" approach to Palestine? (Or if they have, can someone give me some reading material?) I'm referring to how the allies went in and basically rebuild the Axis power nations after WWII when they figured out that leaving them in ruins after WW1 went a long way towards causing WW2. Then, over time, clear benchmarks were set that the Axis powers needed to meet to gradually get independence again. Palestine, as I understand it, is kept under pretty much constant poverty, sanctions, etc. Doesn't this cause an endless loop? Why not just go in and kill the extremists with kindness to strengthen the moderates? /hippie because its not always about money, some people will be quite willing to eat mud to get to a certain goal , whatever it will be. besides, who is going to fund that? As to the latter question of who would fund it, I'd point out that Palestine isn't THAT big of a place. Shouldn't cost THAT much. If it took the ongoing headache away for good from the rest of the world, I'd think it would be a wise longterm investment. As to the former point of "some people just want to watch the world burn", while I agree that you'll never get EVERYONE and there will always be extremists the critical question is HOW MANY extremists there are and how easy it is to replenish them. Extremism is far more common where certain conditions (such as widespread poverty and deprivation) exist. It's a little harder to convince someone to strap a bomb to his chest and go punish the heathen devils if he's otherwise got a pretty happy life I would think. It's where the term "failed nation states" comes from.
[QUOTE="one_plum"]What statement? The thread is in the forum of a question which has led to discussion. What is a direct question/TC, if you're gonna make some sort of a statement, take a more direct approach.
FreddyJeffery
Not much of a comparison can be made between the two. I'm not trying to defend or attack any specific religion, but we all know which institutions normally get most of the bad press and are considered backwards. Seems to me the thread was trying to add fuel to that.
What statement? The thread is in the forum of a question which has led to discussion. What is a direct question/[QUOTE="FreddyJeffery"][QUOTE="one_plum"]
TC, if you're gonna make some sort of a statement, take a more direct approach.
one_plum
Not much of a comparison can be made between the two. I'm not trying to defend or attack any specific religion, but we all know which institutions normally get most of the bad press and are considered backwards. Seems to me the thread was trying to add fuel to that.
Not much of a comparison? The Quran is basically the bible.[QUOTE="one_plum"][QUOTE="FreddyJeffery"]What statement? The thread is in the forum of a question which has led to discussion. What is a direct question/FreddyJeffery
Not much of a comparison can be made between the two. I'm not trying to defend or attack any specific religion, but we all know which institutions normally get most of the bad press and are considered backwards. Seems to me the thread was trying to add fuel to that.
Not much of a comparison? The Quran is basically the bible.Not much of a comparison in the sense how unanimous the public opinion of your question will be.
[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]me, you major, darkman and piejunior. well have shawarmas once peace is made. pie-juniorGot a question for you group then. Why hasn't anyone tried a "Marshall Plan" approach to Palestine? (Or if they have, can someone give me some reading material?) I'm referring to how the allies went in and basically rebuild the Axis power nations after WWII when they figured out that leaving them in ruins after WW1 went a long way towards causing WW2. Then, over time, clear benchmarks were set that the Axis powers needed to meet to gradually get independence again. Palestine, as I understand it, is kept under pretty much constant poverty, sanctions, etc. Doesn't this cause an endless loop? Why not just go in and kill the extremists with kindness to strengthen the moderates? /hippie because israel is all about ruling through the status quo, among other things, for reasons listed above. Israel also doesn't keep 'palestine' in a state of poverty- It tries to keep the hamas regime in Gaza at a state of poverty and seclusion (with the normal efficacy of Israel in trying to accomplish a foreign policy goal, as in, badly). The west bank is (was? idk what's going on there now with all the recent sh!t) the beneficiary of extensive Israeli support. however- the occupation (ie the means to maintain security for military forces and prevent militant excursions into israel) takes its toll; the palestinians have repeatedly rejected any Israeli plan regarding ifrastructures- invoking the lack of the legitimacy of the belligerent occupier in erecting permanent facilities by international law (eg in the Israeli supreme court); and the Israeli action is the west bank isn't properly settled in some thought out plan- but seems to depend more on whims and current political interests.spot on. Although I dont think by this point Israel leaving the WB will mean Fatah launching operations into Israel.
[QUOTE="nocoolnamejim"][QUOTE="BossPerson"]me, you major, darkman and piejunior. well have shawarmas once peace is made. pie-juniorGot a question for you group then. Why hasn't anyone tried a "Marshall Plan" approach to Palestine? (Or if they have, can someone give me some reading material?) I'm referring to how the allies went in and basically rebuild the Axis power nations after WWII when they figured out that leaving them in ruins after WW1 went a long way towards causing WW2. Then, over time, clear benchmarks were set that the Axis powers needed to meet to gradually get independence again. Palestine, as I understand it, is kept under pretty much constant poverty, sanctions, etc. Doesn't this cause an endless loop? Why not just go in and kill the extremists with kindness to strengthen the moderates? /hippie because israel is all about ruling through the status quo, among other things, for reasons listed above. Israel also doesn't keep 'palestine' in a state of poverty- It tries to keep the hamas regime in Gaza at a state of poverty and seclusion (with the normal efficacy of Israel in trying to accomplish a foreign policy goal, as in, badly). The west bank is (was? idk what's going on there now with all the recent sh!t) the beneficiary of extensive Israeli support. however- the occupation (ie the means to maintain security for military forces and prevent militant excursions into israel) takes its toll; the palestinians have repeatedly rejected any Israeli plan regarding ifrastructures- invoking the lack of the legitimacy of the belligerent occupier in erecting permanent facilities by international law (eg in the Israeli supreme court); and the Israeli action is the west bank isn't properly settled in some thought out plan- but seems to depend more on whims and current political interests. So, what about an outside imposed solution? Seems like the politics of both sides, to varying degrees depending on timing, screw things over from the two sides directly involved. U.S. position for decades has been the 1967 borders with agreed upon land swaps. Is this reasonable and, if the political will/pressure from outside of the region was there to basically say, "Do this or we're withdrawing all involvement, aide, support" whatever, what would likely happen?
Neither of them, they're both as primitive and backwards as possible.
Vaultboy-101
What's backwards about loving your neighbour?
:(
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment