Latest US Mass Shooting.....Orlando

[Modelexis]

Originally posted by Kloubek
If Trump does somehow manage to become president and follows through with his platform promise to get rid of all Muslims...

You're attempting to poison the well here. Funny how you can make someone look bad by twisting their words and presenting a bunch of misinformation.

[sputnik]

Originally posted by Kloubek
I don't support any religion, entity, or government that doesn't tolerate the differences in people.

I think you really have to carefully define "tolerate".

Is it alright for Christians/Muslims/Jews to consider gay sex is a sin according to their religion? Or do you consider that to be a form of intolerance/hate towards the LGBT community? Should people be able to believe something contrary to what others do?

I have a Jewish friend that doesn't eat bacon and and Hindu friend that doesn't eat beef. They consider that a sin in their faiths. However I don't consider them to be intolerant to my desire to have a bacon cheeseburger.

Now if one of them shot up a Five Guys because of it, it certainly would obviously be horrible, but I wouldn't consider all Jews/Hindus to be hate filled and terrible because they believe that eating pork/beef is a sin.

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by Buster
If you are a supporter of LGBT rights in any capacity, you have a big problem. And the problem is Islam.

I'm not denying that Islam preaches lack of acceptance of LGBT individuals. But the same statement can be made about Christianity, and mostly any other religion. Religion is not designed to benefit those who don't conform to the rest - it is designed to feed the masses. But even though I do not agree with these stances, it is still ridiculous to say that just because that is the main religion's position that it then translates into killing. The decision to kill is an individual one, and depends largely on how effectively the few higher up on the food chain can convince the sheep to follow their own agenda.

Originally posted by Zephyr


American here. Trump is gaining a lot of support now. There has been some major fuckery on part of the media with censorship. No there won't be civil war if he's president. It's amazing how people eat up the false narrative played by the media here. Yet if you talk to any average citizen, we all know nothing's going to change. And since you are not physically in this country and talking to other Americans, please dont create assumptions based on false narratives.

Disclaimer, I am not a supporter for any candidate.

I'm sure he is. His stance on Muslims resonates with a significant portion of the American population, I'm sure.

I don't spend my time watching what people I don't know have to say about Trump - including the media. Opinions are commonly polar opposites and people generally have ridiculously awesome things to say about him, or equally ridiculously negative things to say.

My opinion is my own, and in fact not once had I ever heard anyone else claiming a potential civil war... both by "experts" or "common folk". While I admit that I'm probably jaded due to my negative opinion of a guy who spews so much hatred, I am basing my "civil war" comments on two things: 1) The fact he said he would get rid of the Muslims, and 2) Historical accounts of what happens in situations where a significant amount of a population becomes oppressed and vilified. There are over 3 million Muslims living in America. If you think that they are all going to idly sit by while they are being forced out of the country or even considered lesser citizens, you are sorely mistaken.

I don't have to physically be in your country to know what happens under such circumstances. And how do you know I don't speak to people in America? I have plenty of people I regularly speak to... including my high school best friend, my brother, and his entire family. For someone who has never met me, you're making some pretty broad assumptions.

[Buster]

Originally posted by Kloubek

...it is still ridiculous to say that just because that is the main religion's position that it then translates into killing. ...

This is an obviously false statement. Religious beliefs have been a direct cause of much killing. You can draw a direct line of Islam and the hatred and killing of gays.

[sputnik]

Originally posted by Buster
Religious beliefs have been a direct cause of much killing.

Many non-religious beliefs can also be attributed to much killing and hatred.

[Buster]

Originally posted by sputnik


Many non-religious beliefs can also be attributed to much killing and hatred.

Why do people always resort to whataboutism?

[sputnik]

Originally posted by Buster
Why do people always resort to whataboutism?

It's called looking at things from a broader viewpoint to gain a better perspective on humanity as a whole and reduce your narrow-minded and ignorant stance on the matter.

Mass murder and religion are FAR from mutually exclusive.

[Buster]

I'm perfectly willing to discuss all of the injustice and atrocities in this world.

Right now we are talking about those that relate to Islam and its teaching of hate for LGBT people.

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by Buster


This is an obviously false statement. Religious beliefs have been a direct cause of much killing. You can draw a direct line of Islam and the hatred and killing of gays.

You missed where I said individuals can choose whether or not they want to follow a religion to it's purist form. Yes, Islam views homosexuality as a crime/sin. But then, so do/did the Catholics, and damn near any other of the 4000 religions in the world. Those less hardline (yes, I used that word again) may simply look down on homosexuals... or even denounce that part of the religion entirely. But others - especially when part of a movement - may take it that step further.

I have Muslim neighbors. Not once have I seen them kill anyone, and I trust them as much as anyone not to do so. Why? Because they DECIDED that it is wrong, and have opted not to get involved with the segment of their religion that believes extreme measures are necessary or acceptable.

I will agree that when the religion is taken to the extreme, and must be followed exactly, that is a negative and potentially violent scenario. But the same could be said of any movement - regardless of whether it is backed by religion or otherwise. Look at the "lovely" things the KKK did only one generation ago. While generally backed by Christianity, all it really ended up being is a bunch of idiotic white guys who banded together in the name of something to do horrible things to others that they felt were "lesser". Yet, would you also say that all Christians were dangerous and violent people at that time? Or how about that group of ranchers in Oregon recently at the wildlife refuge.... not backed by religion at all, but highly dangerous in their collective opinion. Are you going to say that all ranchers in the state are inevitably going to agree with what went on there?

Take the blinders off, man. You have formed an opinion that simply cannot be backed by history or logic.

Now, with that said - let's be honest. These violent acts that are occurring ARE being performed by Muslims. So I'm not saying we should turn a blind eye either. Regrettably, racial profiling - even if it isn't politically correct - would certainly help to make us all more secure by increasing the focus to where it needs to be. I know it sucks for the vast majority of Muslims who are perfectly peaceful, but when a disproportionate amount of individuals that match your profile are causing havoc, it is still statistically the best way of ensuring safety.

But that isn't to say we should make broad assumptions either. It's just a matter of increasing the odds of discovering an issue before it unfolds into a bigger one, based on statistical information. If there was a disproportionate amount of white males between 40 and 45 that were performing terrorist acts, I too would expect and accept having the authorities take a second look at me accordingly.

What I would be upset about, however, is being branded a terrorist without proof and due diligence. And if I knew that the public - and especially the government, which I turn to in order to help me - believes that I'm a horrible person, the chances of me becoming such increases exponentially... especially if the only ones I can turn to are those who are banding together in a common cause to fight back against those same oppressors.

[sputnik]

Originally posted by Buster
Right now we are talking about those that relate to Islam and its teaching of hate for LGBT people.

What percentage of Muslim people in the world believe that it is okay to kill a gay person?

What percentage of Muslim Imams teach that systematic killing of gay people is something that they should be doing?

Define "hate". Is believing that gay sex is sin considered hate?

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by sputnik


I think you really have to carefully define "tolerate".

Is it alright for Christians/Muslims/Jews to consider gay sex is a sin according to their religion? Or do you consider that to be a form of intolerance/hate towards the LGBT community? Should people be able to believe something contrary to what others do?

I have a Jewish friend that doesn't eat bacon and and Hindu friend that doesn't eat beef. They consider that a sin in their faiths. However I don't consider them to be intolerant to my desire to have a bacon cheeseburger.

Sorry Sputnik - I didn't even see your post until now.

I personally don't think it is alright for any religion to consider gay sex a sin (let alone a crime), because in my opinion, that is an archaic mentality based on theories that claim being gay is a choice. With that said, although such a position is one that comes from lack of understanding and ignorance, it is probably an opinion equally as valid as my own. What makes MY opinion so special and warranted, while their opinion is invalid? Mine is based on tolerance and acceptance, and theirs is based on what they've been taught. I believe I am in the right, but then, so do they.

While I think that acceptance of homosexuals would be advantageous for any group or religion to adopt, I think it is asking a lot for a group to change their platform so dramatically overnight - that is the sort of thing that takes generations. And while there are still extremists fueled by that same religion, I highly doubt changing the mentality is even possible on a whole.

Originally posted by sputnik
Now if one of them shot up a Five Guys because of it, it certainly would obviously be horrible, but I wouldn't consider all Jews/Hindus to be hate filled and terrible because they believe that eating pork/beef is a sin.

Well of course you wouldn't. Because you are a reasonable, rationally-thinking person. Unfortunately on the flip side, there are the Busters among us who take some examples (mainly overseas, in what amounts to a completely different world) and feel that is enough to justify branding one and half billion people worldwide. It is really no different than the oppression black people experienced in North America. It takes a while to breed out the ignorance. Regrettably, there is more work do be done there too... especially in the States.

[Buster]

Originally posted by sputnik


What percentage of Muslim people in the world believe that it is okay to kill a gay person?

What percentage of Muslim Imams teach that systematic killing of gay people is something that they should be doing?

Define "hate". Is believing that gay sex is sin considered hate?

The religion teaches it. This is absolutely not in dispute. It's not an interpretation. The Islam view of LGBT rights is hateful, and requests violence. So the only possible argument is how people interpret this in terms of action, opinion, and public policy.

The news does not get better on this front:

- 10 countries maintain LGBT activities as a capital crime. They are all Islamic/Sharia countries. (Source: Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...shed-by-death/)

- 57 Islam dominant countries maintain that it is illegal

- Greater than 50% of British and German Muslims want it to be illegal to be gay. Whether this is a capital crime or just jail time, is unreported. (Source: Pew Research.)

Would you like me to keep going?

there is a big difference between believing something is a "sin", which is just a bigoted and disgusting opinion, and wanting it to be a crime, which is hate.

And the source is the religion.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[duaner]

Originally posted by Sugarphreak

I am sure that there are a lot of Christians that probably believe sex before marriage is a sin, and even should be a crime of some sort

Doesn't mean they go out and kill those who don't follow it

Exactly. And to go with those sins are bestiality, paedophilia, adultery, rape, lust, idolatry, lying, stealing, etc.

I wonder if any of those makes me a bigot and if they are disgusting opinions?

[duaner]

Originally posted by Kloubek


You missed where I said individuals can choose whether or not they want to follow a religion to it's purist form. Yes, Islam views homosexuality as a crime/sin. But then, so do/did the Catholics, and damn near any other of the 4000 religions in the world. Those less hardline (yes, I used that word again) may simply look down on homosexuals... or even denounce that part of the religion entirely. But others - especially when part of a movement - may take it that step further.

I have Muslim neighbors. Not once have I seen them kill anyone, and I trust them as much as anyone not to do so. Why? Because they DECIDED that it is wrong, and have opted not to get involved with the segment of their religion that believes extreme measures are necessary or acceptable.

I will agree that when the religion is taken to the extreme, and must be followed exactly, that is a negative and potentially violent scenario. But the same could be said of any movement - regardless of whether it is backed by religion or otherwise. Look at the "lovely" things the KKK did only one generation ago. While generally backed by Christianity, all it really ended up being is a bunch of idiotic white guys who banded together in the name of something to do horrible things to others that they felt were "lesser". Yet, would you also say that all Christians were dangerous and violent people at that time? Or how about that group of ranchers in Oregon recently at the wildlife refuge.... not backed by religion at all, but highly dangerous in their collective opinion. Are you going to say that all ranchers in the state are inevitably going to agree with what went on there?

Take the blinders off, man. You have formed an opinion that simply cannot be backed by history or logic.

Now, with that said - let's be honest. These violent acts that are occurring ARE being performed by Muslims. So I'm not saying we should turn a blind eye either. Regrettably, racial profiling - even if it isn't politically correct - would certainly help to make us all more secure by increasing the focus to where it needs to be. I know it sucks for the vast majority of Muslims who are perfectly peaceful, but when a disproportionate amount of individuals that match your profile are causing havoc, it is still statistically the best way of ensuring safety.

But that isn't to say we should make broad assumptions either. It's just a matter of increasing the odds of discovering an issue before it unfolds into a bigger one, based on statistical information. If there was a disproportionate amount of white males between 40 and 45 that were performing terrorist acts, I too would expect and accept having the authorities take a second look at me accordingly.

What I would be upset about, however, is being branded a terrorist without proof and due diligence. And if I knew that the public - and especially the government, which I turn to in order to help me - believes that I'm a horrible person, the chances of me becoming such increases exponentially... especially if the only ones I can turn to are those who are banding together in a common cause to fight back against those same oppressors.

I more or less agree with everything here. The majority of Muslims in America are moderates, many of whom left countries with Muslim majorities to escape the violence. They believe that people have the right to believe what they want.

[Seth1968]

What do the typical religious books say about those that don't conform to the particular flavor of God?

I'm thinking contradiction and hypocrisy.

And I'm also thinking of you Duaner.

[duaner]

Originally posted by Buster

there is a big difference between believing something is a "sin", which is just a bigoted and disgusting opinion,

And what of those who are Christians with same-sex attraction who believe same-sex acts are sin? Are they bigots?

And of course it needs to be noted that same-sex acts are considered sin whether committed by homosexual or heterosexual couples.

[duaner]

Originally posted by Seth1968
What do the typical religious books say about those that don't conform to the particular flavor of God?

I'm thinking contradiction and hypocrisy.

And I'm also thinking of you Duaner.

It's nice to know I'm being thought of. Regarding the Bible, that God will judge them.

[Seth1968]

Above and beyond all of this.

Why should YOU care about what consenting adults are sexually doing?

[Buster]

Originally posted by duaner

I more or less agree with everything here. The majority of Muslims in America are moderates, many of whom left countries with Muslim majorities to escape the violence. They believe that people have the right to believe what they want.

Careful with the words moderate.

What we view as extreme or radical is often mainstream thinking among the vast majority of Muslims.