Michael Weiner Should Stick With His Real Last Name On The Radio...

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Remember that word you used but really had no idea what it meant? It applys to you now.

Steven, give up. He lives in his own head and thinks all the world's problems would be solved if only everyone would give up thier own thoughts and think like him. I highly suspect given the power, he would be willing to kill all who oppose his form of "peace and equality".

[ttogreh]

Oh, joy. Gaf is using ad hominems. I win.

Steven, Discussion of the meaning of Joshua, Isaiah, Exodus, and the Koran almost always falls into the discussion of the metaphysical. I cannot prove or disprove the metaphysical; it is a matter of faith.

I accept that people of faith act on the teachings of their sacred texts through a conjunction of faith and understanding. I cannot do anything more than accept that. There is no "right" or "wrong" answer to questions of faith. I am not trying to equivocate, or skirt the issue. I am trying to tell you, outright, that since, in my opinion, no matter what position you take on metaphysical matters, you will be in a position where I cannot dispute it, it is an argument that is already resolved.

My answer is always, "I don't know".

[Steven]

Oh, joy. Gaf is using ad hominems. I win.

Steven, Discussion of the meaning of Joshua, Isaiah, Exodus, and the Koran almost always falls into the discussion of the metaphysical. I cannot prove or disprove the metaphysical; it is a matter of faith.

I accept that people of faith act on the teachings of their sacred texts through a conjunction of faith and understanding. I cannot do anything more than accept that. There is no "right" or "wrong" answer to questions of faith. I am not trying to equivocate, or skirt the issue. I am trying to tell you, outright, that since, in my opinion, no matter what position you take on metaphysical matters, you will be in a position where I cannot dispute it, it is an argument that is already resolved.

My answer is always, "I don't know".

well all subjects require faith to hold a position ttogreh, and all facts can be disputed, and all arguments are worthy of consideration - unless the goal is simply to assert oneself as the victor. If thats your agenda - then of course I can see your distaste for it.

must you however, always have to be able to "win"? [Oh, joy. Gaf is using ad hominems. I win.]

sometimes I want to discuss a given subject simply because I want to unpack it more. I think thats healthy for everybody.

[ttogreh]

I only "win" when someone is reduced to using logical fallacies to dispute my position. In all other cases, it is either "oh, that's interesting, here's another piece of information" or "thank you for your valid opinion".

Steven, thank you for your valid opinion. I simply must reiterate that metaphysical discussions, due to their inherently personal and unverifiable nature, are not discussions in which I thrive.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

"Slay the pagans wherever you may come upon them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every conceivable place..." (9:5)

"Now when you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks until you overcome them fully..." (47:4)

“Oh ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers and let them find harshness in you.” 9:123

“Fight them on until there is no more tumult and religion becomes that of Allah” 2:193

"Fight those who do not believe in God and the last day... and fight People of the Book, (Christian and Jews) who do not accept the religion of truth (Islam) until they pay tribute (Zizziya tax) by hand, being inferior.” 9:29

"I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them." 8:12

http://www.faithfreedom.org/

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

For you to win we would have to be in some kind of competition. Last I checked we were in a conversation. but if we were in a competition, you would have lost, because you used ad hominems first. But hey, that doesn't matter, you see what you want to.

[Steven]

I only "win" when someone is reduced to using logical fallacies to dispute my position. In all other cases, it is either "oh, that's interesting, here's another piece of information" or "thank you for your valid opinion".

Steven, thank you for your valid opinion. I simply must reiterate that metaphysical discussions, due to their inherently personal and unverifiable nature, are not discussions in which I thrive.

You do indeed have an interesting "me first" approach.

Unfortunately I'm not convinced the merits of that approach really do you much good in the long run.

[hunhee]

oh I agree.

but if his suit is without merit then he'll get his clock cleaned.

and spend money in the process.

who is his advertising support by the way?

thats who its costing.

(by the way we kinda do that in here too)

Last I checked Steven, DGN is NOT the United States, and with the DGN Constitution, freedom of speach wasn't one of them.

If the mods feel that something is amiss about the way something is said, we discuss it, Ad Nauseum and there are mods on this board who have very VERY differing opinions, but nothing is done unless we have some type of agreement.

Apparently not. Why don't you just, in plain words, tell me what I really am. You know me so much better than I know myself.

Gaf & tteg stop provoking. This is only going to lead to both your arguments being thrown out, and no one actually reading what you have to say.

I admit I enjoy watching you two talk it out, I love intelligent conversations, but when things are edited, we don't get the benefit of the argument with all it's vim and vigor.

I don;t deny that some people who claim to be Christian are extremists. I deny they are Christians. Christianity does not teach it's followers to kill anyone that does not follow the tenants of Christianity. Islam on the hand does. It's spelled out in plain words repeatedly in the Qurran.

Can't people who are muslims deny those muslims that are extremists? It still makes them muslim. Just because you read your set of doctrines and come up with a particular conclusion, doesn't mean that other christians (whom you don't put yourself inlign with, for some weird reason) any less christians.

I think you guys just like to sugar coat things to make it fit YOU, well some people are very passionate about LITERAL interpretations of their texts, doesn't make them any less right or wrong, but it does make them "christians"

well all subjects require faith to hold a position ttogreh, and all facts can be disputed, and all arguments are worthy of consideration - unless the goal is simply to assert oneself as the victor. If thats your agenda - then of course I can see your distaste for it.

must you however, always have to be able to "win"? [Oh, joy. Gaf is using ad hominems. I win.]

sometimes I want to discuss a given subject simply because I want to unpack it more. I think thats healthy for everybody.

Wow are you so rediculously involved in yourselves that you can't smell sarcasm? I believe that he was being sarcastic in this line, and meant it to be read as so. It DRIPPED with sarcasm.

I'm not defending either side here, but I do wish you guys would read your own posts, and notice that you're all sounding a bit rediculous.

End of me ranting, continue...

[Steven]

well hello Hunhee.

too much quoting.

let's just go from here:

A) your comment about the constitutional rights of DGN'rs: you seem irritated. I know the drill, how it works, and I believe that at times its biased. That has nothing to do with freedom of speech, it has everything to do with accountability and decency and order. And I never ask permission to speak anyway Hunhee. Sorry if that makes you look as human as your moderating cohorts - nobody in this webring is without an agenda babe, not even you. By the way this is sort of old now aint it, this response of yours to my post about a radio personalities right to free speech in exchange for coin?

B) on what makes a christian (sorta): I think you mean well here. I "get" what your trying to say. In telling Mark his situation is "weird" you start to slide sideways into sarcasm mode yrouself - careful, its catchy. And everybody coats things for their own palatibility, jesus lets be real here. We do the best we can with what we've got to sort out truth from truth and opinion from opinion, your not any closer than any of us Hunhee, but I dont think your weird, just proud.....sorta like me.

C) were you serious with the sarcasm question? ANYWAY - I was asking for soemthing very specific from ttogreh so that we could dig into the subject some more - since he gave us such an undeniable set of "facts". Sarcasm or not - dude your SO missing the obvious here.

[ttogreh]

Verifiable set of facts. All facts can be countered.

Indeed, most statements can only be countered. Very few can be completely discredited. Except when someone makes a blanket statement, like "all large populations of Muslims fall under Sharia law", which can be countered with... "Turkey is a secular republic".

"The Koran urges all Muslims to kill the infidel", which is a fact... can be countered with "Joshua was a mass murderer, and God Himself killed thousands of Egyptian boys in their sleep", which are both also facts.

Gaf's blanket statements are totally and verifiably discredited, and his verifiable facts are shown to be specious, not only by me, but by Shade Everdark himself.

As to why God killed those Egyptian boys, or why God blessed Joshua's killings... that is another thread.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

"The Koran urges all Muslims to kill the infidel", which is a fact... can be countered with "Joshua was a mass murderer, and God Himself killed thousands of Egyptian boys in their sleep", which are both also facts.

How exactly is that counter? The Bible, no where, tells it's followers to kill in the name of God. It does say that at a point in time certain followers were told to kill. That is not the same thing as the blanket statements within the Quran... which I quoted above. Those statements are direct orders from God to kill non-believers.

if I understand you... telling a tale about a WWII battle is the same thing as telling modern solders to go kill German people.

I don't buy that for a second.

[ttogreh]

Therein lies the nut of the argument. While the Koran says for Muslims to kill those of lukewarm faith and the infidel, I don't hear much about Faith murders in Dearborn. The sacred texts are ALWAYS open to interpretation.

Pointing out that the Koran has violence and calls for violence... is pointless. All faiths have violence in their history or in their texts.

Muslims are not incapable of modernity or secular thought. I have the entire country of Turkey, my friend John, and the Council on American Islamic Relations to back me up.

You... have Michael Weiner.

[Steven]

Therein lies the nut of the argument. While the Koran says for Muslims to kill those of lukewarm faith and the infidel, I don't hear much about Faith murders in Dearborn. The sacred texts are ALWAYS open to interpretation.

Pointing out that the Koran has violence and calls for violence... is pointless. All faiths have violence in their history or in their texts.

Muslims are not incapable of modernity or secular thought. I have the entire country of Turkey, my friend John, and the Council on American Islamic Relations to back me up.

You... have Michael Weiner.

this argument seems to disregard the surrounding culture though.

I would gather that its a bit more difficult to carry out a long term Jihad in Dearborn than it would be to rise up against infidels in the motherland.

and before you tell me that that mindset does not exist ttogreh - i worked as a K9 Handler in Detroit (and philly,and in VA) - a bomb detection K9 handler. I have been on alerts for exactly this which you seem to say does not exist, and thats not accurate either - these things fly under the radar all the time, and sometimes right next door to you. In fact there is a great deal of extremism that exists all around us that is constantly thwarted and cut off prior to fruition, that is likewise factual - I got trained and paid to be an opposing part of that threat.

Marks calling out a directive in sacred texts for violence is not pointless at all - it just carries no value for you. Why is it that you in particular, have the authority to call what does and does not have merit?

and although you make decent points about biblical referances - they are partial explanations - and you are attatching them to a push toward forwarding a gospel, and this is not really accurate. When you do this you have a tendency to twist arguments away fromtheir original points or perspectives. And you oppose argmuents that are not being made - such as yoru point about muslims being incapable of modernity....I cant find the original argument there - so your point is actually confusing to me.

[ttogreh]

Muslims are not incapable of modernity.

Yes, I am sure that extremism exists everywhere. Here, Turkey, Indonesia, Northern Ireland...

I am rejecting the blanket statement that Islam is a "virus". I am calling for social dialog and engagement with moderates and conservative leaders in Islam. Extremism will always exist, but it will only thrive if you feed it.

Rejection of the act and engagement with the community is easy for me to say, sitting here in my comfortable chair in my comfortable home in suburbia, but it is what works. You have peace through strength AND dialog.

Calling the faith of 1.61 billion people a "virus"... isn't helpful.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Just do a search for Sharia law and England. or France or Iran or any of the stans most of polinesia...

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/001493.php

Survey: 81% of Detroit Muslims want Sharia in Muslim Countries

[ttogreh]

Turkey, Gaf. Turkey.

Gobble gobble gobble!

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Omar M. Ahmad founder of CAIR said: "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant" he said. "The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America , and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth,"

[ttogreh]

James Dobson, Gaf.

This is spectacularly easy.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Why don't you actually try to refute something?

You have not disproven anything I have said or anything that Muslim's themselves say.

You keep throwing Christianity in my face like it is somehow relavant to the conversation.

Why not directly address the points I am bring up?

here is some more information for you to ignore...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/special...2&cset=true

Over the last 40 years, small groups of devout Muslim men have gathered in homes in U.S. cities to pray, memorize the Koran and discuss events of the day.

But they also addressed their ultimate goal, one so controversial that it is a key reason they have operated in secrecy: to create Muslim states overseas and, they hope, someday in America as well.

These men are part of an underground U.S. chapter of the international Muslim Brotherhood, the world's most influential Islamic fundamentalist group and an organization with a violent past in the Middle East. But fearing persecution, they rarely identify themselves as Brotherhood members and have operated largely behind the scenes, unbeknown even to many Muslims.

Still, the U.S. Brotherhood has had a significant and ongoing impact on Islam in America, helping establish mosques, Islamic schools, summer youth camps and prominent Muslim organizations. It is a major factor, Islamic scholars say, in why many Muslim institutions in the nation have become more conservative in recent decades.

ignore the writing on the wall, it's your choice.

[Shade Everdark]

Ive been out of this thread for awhile.

"rights" to public expression.....who then do you say should have the final say so Shade?

Some type of governmental authority, or the influence of the people as they do or do not express themselves thru the spending of dollars?

Monetary, capitalistic influence already exists, to a certain extent, but of course our influence is being eroded by the lobbyist elite, though that's going far afield of the topic.

As for who gets the final say so, that's easy: you and I do, Steven. Jury of peers. I wait for the day someone brings a slander or hate speech suit against the Weiners, O'Reillys, and Limbaughs of the American airwaves.

[Steven]

Monetary, capitalistic influence already exists, to a certain extent, but of course our influence is being eroded by the lobbyist elite, though that's going far afield of the topic.

As for who gets the final say so, that's easy: you and I do, Steven. Jury of peers. I wait for the day someone brings a slander or hate speech suit against the Weiners, O'Reillys, and Limbaughs of the American airwaves.

Slander suits I can understand - if there are unsubstantiated claims that are proven to have caused personal harm (and that gets tricky).....Hate Speech Suits.......that one I cant get behind, because even hate speech is a protected right. I'm not condoning it. Im simply saying that unfortunately it too needs to be protected in order to preserve equality

[ttogreh]

Gaf, for the last forty years, evangelical conservatives have been an integral part of the Republican party. Mike Huckabee openly advocates for the creation of amendments to the United States constitution to bar homosexuals from marriage, and to make abortion a crime.

The man has accrued millions of American votes.

The answer to conservatism is not force or anger. It is open dialog and education. The answer to extremism is condemning the act, engaging with the larger community, and expressing force when appropriate.

Any ways, you are convinced that a coming jihadist storm is coming, one in which you will be vindicated for holding views like "Islam is a virus", and "sharia law will be imposed on us".

When your hope for vindication is inherently negative and unmitigated, you have a problem.

My world view is vindicated when I walk out the door and have a pizza with John.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Again, your throwing up arguments that have nothing at all to do with the subject at hand. You are avoiding actually addressing any question posed to you.

So, I will address what your saying.

Muslim don't suppress the rights of Homosexuals. Sharai law dictates that homosexuals be killed.

Muslims don't frown on adulterers like Christians do... they stone them to death.

Muslims don't put people in jail for a time period based on the "level" of theft, they cut their hands off and their head if they do it a second time.

Muslims don't lecture people that loose faith like Christians do, they hang them and set them on fire before they die.

Muslim's don't negotiate in good faith as most civilized people of the world do, they are taught, by the Quran, to lie to non-believers to get what they want then kill them at first chance.

I'll compare modern day Islam to any other world religion or culture you want to name.

You really need to stop trying to impose your limited view of how things should be onto what things are. Your Muslim friend is not representative of all of Islam. Unless he is an Imam, he can't even speak for Islam.

[ttogreh]

Muslims are not a monolith, and you know it.

Turkey is a secular republic.

There is violence, and the call for violence in Christianity and Judaism.

Black and white thinking kills.

I live a life of happiness and positivity. I include people of all walks of life in my social circle. Can you say the same about yourself? I doubt it, if you spend your free time advocating for the destruction of the culture of 1.61 billion human beings.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Name a verse of the Bible or Torah that tells followers to kill non-believers.

Directly answer a question. Just once.

Denial gets people killed just as fast.

I'm not advocating the destruction of anything. I said I would not mind if Islam was removed from existence. Advocate seems to be another word you think you know the meaning of.

As for my friends. one of my longest and best friends is an Iranian. He used to be a Muslim. He left Iran and Islam to get away from the murdering Islamic regime that is pushing for a world Calif. I also have Jewish friends. I'm going to dinner tomorrow with a Hindu couple and then a movie. My father was a Buddhist. My mother was a Wiccan, but converted to Christianity in her later life.

My point is, you don't know me. At all.