neither one, in my opinion.

false dichotomies and generalizations only feed the fire of the dogmatic extremists.

cut it out.

 

Thought I might as well include what ShakeZula thinks is the sixth pillar.
Jihad
In the early days of Islam, the Kharijite sect are said to have claimed that jihad was the sixth pillar of Islam [1]; see also takfir.) However, the surviving Kharijites (that is, the Ibadis) of the present day reject this doctrine.
The Egyptian founder of Islamic Jihad, Abd al-Salam Farag (1952-1982), published a pamphlet in the wake of Anwar Sadat's assassination called "The Neglected Duty", attempting to argue that Jihad was the sixth pillar of Islam but that corrupt ulema had hidden the fact. This conspiracy theory has very little support outside Islamic Jihad and a few other similar terrorist groups. Jihad is viewed as a requirement by some, but very few have classified it as a pillar, and the scholars have unanimously condemned the idea.

 

You did read the entire thread, and you were talking to everyone, weren't you old tool, because there's a lot of false dichotomies and generalizations on both sides of this issue, and it kind of sounded like you were just talking to Arab Guy and I'm sure that's not the case, is it old tool?

 

I have read the entire thread . . .

and in that particular case, I was addressing the person who initiated the discussion and not anyone else. But, in the interest of ensuring others feel included (you know, the whole fairness thing) - you cut it out as well, stumbler.

thanks!

 

Then it seems odd that you should mention the word fairness in your response old tool because that is the last thing you're being in this instance.

Actually I'm a little surprised. You've been so scholarly up to this point old tool and fairness or, lets elevate it to objectivity, is a scholarly virtue.

Did you read the entire thread? It has been cantankerous at times but there has also been a great deal of enlightening information that is actually the solution for false dichotomies and generalizations and I’d think you would have an appreciation for that.

But once again you’re welcome.

 

look... both sides have extremists and both have a bloody history. fact of the matter is do you see christians going around these days and cutting peoples throats and prostesting holding signs that say behead those who insult islam? also saying they get treated unfair and are trying to change our laws to suit them. screw that if they want their so call freedom where they beat women and put them in burkas they can stay over there and not come here. now im sure im gonna get flamed by some of the liberals on this forum, do as you wish but its only you that will be digging your own grave. let me say one more thing, if you want to side with the extremists why don't you go over and live in iran or saudi arabia for awhile then come back and tell us how good your living conditions were and how you were treated and how others were, because i can assure you it's not as good as america.

 

So, are you suggesting that because we enjoy a higher standard of living and have more freedoms, that means that Christianity is better than Islam?

Sorry...as syllogisms go, that one sucks.

 

I wouldn't say so much as Christianity, but rather Western culture is definitely better. In Islamic countries, you can't seperate religion and politics, the are locked at the hilt. I see nothing wrong with saying that yes, we have it better, because our women are not hung or stoned for being raped. Wouldn't you?

-S-

 

I would also say that Islam is much bloodier. How many people did Christ kill? Yeah, none. Verses Mohammed, who in one instance I just read about, attacked and besieged the city of Medina. After he overwhelmed them, he dug pits in the market and had 6 to 900 men beheaded and their bodies buried there. Afterwords he divided up the women, children and wealth among his troops. Mohammed, mind you, the founder of their faith, the religion of peace. Their crime, these poor dead souls? They resisted him and refused conversion to Islam. Well, that's not entirely true, one person agreed to conversion.

-S-

 

I did not realize . . .

that you had been assigned the role of mediator within the context of these threads. My comment was solely directed at Arab Guy, it is a reasonable observation and request, and it isn't necessary to address everybody concerning Arab Guy's behavior. If, and when, I get a bee in my bonnet to address others involved in this thread, I will do so. In the interim, I will kindly ask you to resist the urge to guide me into your idea of proper conversation etiquette.

Thanks :-|

 

Just pointing out what I believe is the hypocracy of your comment. What makes it a reasonable observation and request for many others to post anti muslim threads and wrong for Arab Guy to post a tread about the biased and prejudiced way the West views Muslims?
Are you saying its alright for we in the west to have our view of Muslims and the Middle East but not alright for someone from the Middle East to post there view of how the west appears to them. That seems very prejudical and one sided to me.
You may have every right to address your comment to Arab Guy but everyone on this forum or the world for that matter has a right to tell you what they think is wrong with it.
And you can ask me as kindly as you want to resist calling a bullshit on you when I think you're wrong, but I think you'll find it won't work too well.
But if you want to address you reasonable observations and requests solely to Arab Guy you can always PM him. Otherwise your posted comments are open for discussion my me or anyone else.

 

:roll:

-S-

 

The fact that Jesus didn't kill anyone is what makes the killing done in his name all the more abhorrent.

 

Yes, I'm thankful I don't live in a theocracy, because then my freedom would be under constant threat. And that's what many Christians seem to want for this country as well.

By the way, how does it sit with you that the president can, according to him and his attorney general, tap my phones, read my mail, arrest me without charge, ship me off to some offshore hell-hole of a prison, torture me, deny me access to a lawyer, and hold me forever?

 

It doesn't sit well with me at all. Never have I claimed allegiance with Bush and his policies. But you can't honestly say that what could happen, hypothetically to the average American, and what does happen currently to Muslims across the world done by their own government, are the same thing. And what some christians scream for is also no where near reality. There's a saying, it goes "An empty cart rattles the most." Christians scream and wail and it's all you hear, because the people who don't really care, don't speak up. They don't really feel threatened.

Look at the Ten Commandments in what was it, Georgia I think? Tennessee? Either way, some deep south bible-thumping state. And even there, in what you'd think was a conservative Christian stronghold, they couldn't keep the sculpture in the courthouse. Then there's also Terry Schivio. President Bush called a special session of congress to try and keep her on the tube and Christians were praying across the country to keep her alive, exerting pressure everywhere they could, and she's dead.

Christian conservatives are a loud voice, to be sure, but they are a hollow voice. And Bush is one man who's time is almost up.

-S-

 

For which I give fervent thanks to God daily.

 

You and me both, sister. I'm rather fond of my porn and my free-wheeling ways. America rarely swings too far in one direction. As I said before, it tends to move back and forth, every other decade or so, all pendulum-like. Or if you want, we can use a wave analogy. We're in the trough vs. the crest of the wave. It all balances out in the end.

-S-

 

I wish I shared your confidence in this country's resilience. But we have only 200+ years of history, and in that time the U.S. has flirted with disaster several times. Our democracy isn't as robust as some people seem to think it is. I would never have believed, six years ago, that any president would be capable of doing this much damage to the Constitution in so short a time.

And most people, having slept through civics class when they were young, are now either sleepwalking or cheerleading.

 

geeeez, this doens't need to be so convoluted . . .

Everyone of the inferences that you drew from my very simple statement are creations of your own particular mindset. I addressed the original poster because he is the one responsible for beginning the discussion based on a false dichotmy and broad generalizations. I have not yet addressed my opinion to any other person in this string, and feel no obligation to do so in a timeframe you construct. If you wish to construe this as "hypocrisy" somehow - I think you will have a tough time getting it to meet any definition test. Lastly, is there some unwritten rule about when one should post opinions or responses in the public forum versus using PM?

Now, if you wish to discuss the subject Arab Guy started, great - but I've really no further interest in discussing the discussers.

 

Hey ShakeZula are your arguments so weak and ego so shakey that you have to make up statements and attribute them to me as you did in post 180?

I never said any such thing and you know it.

I think that corrupts the process here and is actually unethical.

Why would you stoop to such trickery?