Society/Culture Why I blame Islam for the fact it's raining today....

[Rusty Brookes]

That was 2 different countries. But as I said in my post above, I wonder if the Libs are opening Pandora's Box with the religious freedom bill they want to bring in here.

Where does the line get drawn in terms of opposing rights ?

That was my first reaction here. Totally ludicrous situation (they weren't asking him to eat the bloody ham) but isn't this exactly the sort of thing this religious freedom bill is designed to enshrine? If the bill goes through, the driver would be well within his legal right to deny them the service. Which I think is wrong.

I would have thought this is a pretty clear illustration of why secular laws must always trump religious ones.

 

[Connoisseur]

This could all have been avoided if Joyce (i.e hard left) had just sucked it up and not let his over inflated fragile ego spiral out of control and go after an employee who simply expressed typical 2000+ year old Christian doctrine on his own free time. Doctrine that is supported by the majority of millions of Christians over the world in Europe, Africa, North and South America and Asia. It had nothing to do with Rugby Australia, all they needed to say was that Folau is entitled to his own beliefs outside of company time however those opinions are not endorsed by his employers and leave it at that.

I'm not a fan of bending over backwards for all religious practices (i.e. throwing homosexuals off roofs like 'some' Muslims do for kicks on a lazy hot afternoon) but demanding that people have to tow the company line 24/7/365 is absurdly draconian/fascist and not a path that people who honestly cherish democratic values (and not cherry pick things that they agree with) want to go down.

All that rubbish that people are not free from the consequences of their actions is specious disingenuous nonsense as an equivalent to Folau's 'homosexuality is sinful' would be a gay person losing their job for saying that homosexuals make better parents than heterosexuals. It's an incredibly stupid statement to make but people shouldn't lose their jobs for saying stupid things. Losing a job should occur when genuinely hateful language such as expressing that killing apostates is perfectly fine according to their religious teachings (*cough* *cough* Islam), gays should be thrown off roofs for a laugh, etc... Not that hard really.

 

[Evolved1]

97% of climate sciences say AGW is real, based on modelling.

99.9% of terrorist attacks globally are by Muslims, based on empirical data.

Yet only one of these is evidence of something. Right?

I'd like to see the data you're using.

My data says that over 50% of terrorist attacks are conducted by rich white old American Christian politicians.

 

[Evolved1]

So the organisations collecting the stats are all racist too?

All of them?

It must be tough in your ivory tower, surrounded by so much racism.

Well, yeah...when the organisation collecting those stats is the KKK, there's a good chance racism is behind it.

 

[Evolved1]

No s**t they are. But this was just another one of Andrew Birch's attempts to smear a muslim because he doesn't like them. He never responds to me though, because he's a coward and I know he doesn't have me on ignore because Mods can't ignore anyone. I've now called him out for his hypocrisy and lies probably 40 times, but he still does it because he's prejudicial and is a 40+ year old spamming alt-right memes on a forum like he's 15.

I'm fairly certain he has me on ignore. It's funny that the racist homophobic Christian fundamentalist crowd seem to be the biggest snowflakes.

I had him pegged as one of those first year uni students cheering on the rich politicians who are taking away his rights. He must be a slow learner.

 

[Evolved1]

That was 2 different countries. But as I said in my post above, I wonder if the Libs are opening Pandora's Box with the religious freedom bill they want to bring in here.

Where does the line get drawn in terms of opposing rights ?

The line will only be drawn when Muslims use new religious freedoms in the same way Christians intend for them to be used by Christians.

 

[Evolved1]

This could all have been avoided if Joyce (i.e hard left) had just sucked it up and not let his over inflated fragile ego spiral out of control and go after an employee who simply expressed typical 2000+ year old Christian doctrine on his own free time. Doctrine that is supported by the majority of millions of Christians over the world in Europe, Africa, North and South America and Asia. It had nothing to do with Rugby Australia, all they needed to say was that Folau is entitled to his own beliefs outside of company time however those opinions are not endorsed by his employers and leave it at that.

I'm not a fan of bending over backwards for all religious practices (i.e. throwing homosexuals off roofs like 'some' Muslims do for kicks on a lazy hot afternoon) but demanding that people have to tow the company line 24/7/365 is absurdly draconian/fascist and not a path that people who honestly cherish democratic values (and not cherry pick things that they agree with) want to go down.

All that rubbish that people are not free from the consequences of their actions is specious disingenuous nonsense as an equivalent to Folau's 'homosexuality is sinful' would be a gay person losing their job for saying that homosexuals make better parents than heterosexuals. It's an incredibly stupid statement to make but people shouldn't lose their jobs for saying stupid things. Losing a job should occur when genuinely hateful language such as expressing that killing apostates is perfectly fine according to their religious teachings (*cough* *cough* Islam), gays should be thrown off roofs for a laugh, etc... Not that hard really.

Given that a large percentage of Folau's contract comes from sponsorship, he should have known better than to s**t where he eats.

When Bachar Houli or Usman Khawaja does something that stupid, they will get the same treatment.

It amazes me that anyone is gullible enough to still see Folau as a victim of any kind. He took the money and ran ffs.

 

[HairyO]

I'd like to see the data you're using.

My data says that over 50% of terrorist attacks are conducted by rich white old American Christian politicians.

List of Islamist terrorist attacks - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I dont think Wikipedia tracks non Islamic terrorist attacks, but only because it would be quite a small page. One or 2 a year.

BTW: here is the ones which were stopped as well.

List of thwarted Islamic terrorist attacks - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Im sure you can name on 2 hands the non Islamic terrorist attacks of the last few decades. But maybe you are good at research and can use fingers and toes.

The line will only be drawn when Muslims use new religious freedoms in the same way Christians intend for them to be used by Christians.

Which is a serious concern. Freedom to marry your 13 year old daughter to your 55 year old brother.

 

[Evolved1]

List of Islamist terrorist attacks - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I dont think Wikipedia tracks non Islamic terrorist attacks, but only because it would be quite a small page. One or 2 a year.

BTW: here is the ones which were stopped as well.

List of thwarted Islamic terrorist attacks - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Im sure you can name on 2 hands the non Islamic terrorist attacks of the last few decades. But maybe you are good at research and can use fingers and toes.



Which is a serious concern. Freedom to marry your 13 year old daughter to your 55 year old brother.

I didn't see empirical data on your wiki links to justify your claim that 99.9% of terrorist attacks are conducted by Muslims.

The red herrings are irrelevant. Please provide the data I asked for.

 

[CM9000]

Most people are good or bad irrespective of their religion. Personally I've found the less religious someone is, the more likely they are to be a decent person.

That's actually a very insulting thing to say, in my opinion. To imply that religion somehow leads to an inclination towards bad actions is genuinely an offensive thing to say.

It's a bit like saying that "I've found the more white a person is, the less likely they to be violent." Of course, religion isn't as intrinsic as skin colour, but in law, we put religious discrimination alongside racism, homophobia and other similar offences, so the government seems to think it's at least of the same essence - in actuality, it's as much of a personal and individual thing as the aforementioned. The lack of what makes a person a self doesn't lead to understanding, in fact, I'd argue the opposite.

 

[medusala]

Most people are good or bad irrespective of their religion.

Maybe but see below.

Accept Terms and Conditions on JSTOR

JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

www.jstor.org

Many terrorist attacks in the last six months have one thing in common – the involvement of Muslim converts. Converts play a disproportionate role in Islamist terrorism internationally, yet we know very little about them.

 

[CheapCharlie]

So we can force them to take ham in the boot, but a christian cake maker for a gay wedding? STEP. TOO. FAR.

What is your stance?
The Under driver should be allowed to cancel the ride because the passenger is carrying ham?

 

[CheapCharlie]

Maybe but see below.

Accept Terms and Conditions on JSTOR

JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

www.jstor.org

Many terrorist attacks in the last six months have one thing in common – the involvement of Muslim converts. Converts play a disproportionate role in Islamist terrorism internationally, yet we know very little about them.

Islam gives the psychological nutters more of a license to kill in the name of God than other religions.
ISIS style groups in the last few years have at least collected tens of thousands of these deranged imbeciles from across the world and sent to places like Syria and Iraq where they have fortunately been killed. So at least from a numbers POV the current supply has dwindled

 

[CheapCharlie]

Surprising how quiet some of the regulars on here are in condemning what the cleric said. I guess it's okay when a muslim cleric says such things.
Would they be so quiet if a Catholic priest said the same thing?

 

[Andrew Birch]

Islam gives the psychological nutters more of a license to kill in the name of God than other religions.
ISIS style groups in the last few years have at least collected tens of thousands of these deranged imbeciles from across the world and sent to places like Syria and Iraq where they have fortunately been killed. So at least from a numbers POV the current supply has dwindled

So long as the concept of "Jihad" (a holy war waged on behalf of Islam as a religious duty) is an accepted part of the Quran and the Muslim world in general, Islam will continue to have an over representation of converts with murderous intent.

 

[Andrew Birch]

Surprising how quiet some of the regulars on here are in condemning what the cleric said. I guess it's okay when a muslim cleric says such things.
Would they be so quiet if a Catholic priest said the same thing?

I think we both know the answer to that.

 

[Rettolalia]

NHS money well spent

Royal Derby Hospital: Disposable sterile hijabs introduced

Junior doctor Farah Roslan got the idea after having to leave an operating theatre due to her hijab.

www.bbc.com

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

NHS money well spent

Royal Derby Hospital: Disposable sterile hijabs introduced

Junior doctor Farah Roslan got the idea after having to leave an operating theatre due to her hijab.

www.bbc.com

100% agree with you. If this increases the labour pool and so improves patient/staff ratios it IS money well spent.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

Im sure you can name on 2 hands the non Islamic terrorist attacks of the last few decades. But maybe you are good at research and can use fingers and toes.

Might need a blast of gamma radiation to grow some extra appendages Hairy. This is a list of terrorist attacks and perps in the United States from 1980 til 2005

https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005#terror_05sum

Of course September 11, 2001 is the biggie in terms of death toll. There's no arguments against that, The sheer amount of groups that have been active in the U.S though, it was surprising to me.

​

 

[JackOutback]

That's actually a very insulting thing to say, in my opinion. To imply that religion somehow leads to an inclination towards bad actions is genuinely an offensive thing to say.

It's a bit like saying that "I've found the more white a person is, the less likely they to be violent." Of course, religion isn't as intrinsic as skin colour, but in law, we put religious discrimination alongside racism, homophobia and other similar offences, so the government seems to think it's at least of the same essence - in actuality, it's as much of a personal and individual thing as the aforementioned. The lack of what makes a person a self doesn't lead to understanding, in fact, I'd argue the opposite.

They are not even remotely comparable. Skin colour doesn’t influence behaviour, religion does. Now I’ve met good and bad people, both religious and not, but I do think there is some truth to the idea that the more religious someone is, the more they care about their ‘tribe’ over others.

 

[HairyO]

Might need a blast of gamma radiation to grow some extra appendages Hairy. This is a list of terrorist attacks and perps in the United States from 1980 til 2005

https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005#terror_05sum

Of course September 11, 2001 is the biggie in terms of death toll. There's no arguments against that, The sheer amount of groups that have been active in the U.S though, it was surprising to me.

​

Maybe it needs defining. Is every death threat to a politician a terrorist act? By definition, yes.

My list was acts intending to kill.

I read something a few years ago that it was over 12,000 in the previous decade. I dont think it would have slowed down.

 

[Andrew Birch]

 

[CM9000]

They are not even remotely comparable. Skin colour doesn’t influence behaviour, religion does. Now I’ve met good and bad people, both religious and not, but I do think there is some truth to the idea that the more religious someone is, the more they care about their ‘tribe’ over others.

Wait, I'm confused. What do you mean by religion "influences"? are you saying that, when provided with such a thing, people don't interpret it and base their choices on this interpretation? That it just causes an action in someone, rather than the person choosing what to do based on what they know?

I think what you're saying is a bit disingenuous, IMO. Religion doesn't make people more "tribal" - if anything, it seems to me that your prerogative sense of the word demonstrates an ahistorical view of history. Religion isn't some backwards ideal invented by mankind that is now past its use by date, it's a thing that has gone through a significant process of development over 2000 years. It isn't the same as it was two millennia ago. This is similar to assuming there has been a conflict between science and religion over history - that is despite the fact that historians of science themselves reject this very assumption, saying it's far more complex than that. Likewise, the conflict in the Middle East is far, far more complicated than it simply having to do with religion.

The government recognises religous discrimination as being in the same vein as racial and sexual. It's law. As such, our own government seems to assume that religion is a very personal and individual thing, of the same essence as skin colour (not the exact same thing, though) i.e. as a right. This is the same in many countries elsewhere in the world, who all seem to agree on it to an extent. Not that proves what I'm saying, it just shows that the governments of nations see it as such.

 

[Evolved1]

That's actually a very insulting thing to say, in my opinion. To imply that religion somehow leads to an inclination towards bad actions is genuinely an offensive thing to say.

It's a bit like saying that "I've found the more white a person is, the less likely they to be violent." Of course, religion isn't as intrinsic as skin colour, but in law, we put religious discrimination alongside racism, homophobia and other similar offences, so the government seems to think it's at least of the same essence - in actuality, it's as much of a personal and individual thing as the aforementioned. The lack of what makes a person a self doesn't lead to understanding, in fact, I'd argue the opposite.

Is it offensive for religious people to claim that they are better, chosen, more righteous, or more worthy of an afterlife in Heaven?

 

[CM9000]

Is it offensive for religious people to claim that they are better, chosen, more righteous, or more worthy of an afterlife in Heaven?

Sure, by the minority that do it (despite the fact this is literally the antithesis to the Abrahamic religions, although both Judaism and Islam are both hard to convert to). Just as it is offensive to claim that religion makes people more violent.