Posted: Jul 15, 2015 11:17 am
by Thomas Eshuis
Peter Brown wrote:
Sendraks wrote:
Peter Brown wrote:no, my dislike of Islam is whats in the Qur'an backed by what happened over 1400 years of history.


We can say the same about the bible and what has happened over 2000 years of history.

Basically, you can condemn christanity on exactly the same basis that you condemn islam. So why choose one over the other?

We dislike both religions. We think they are both bad and problematic. However, we do not think that the problems associated with those religions extend to every person who follows those religions. You think that Islam is somehow extra-specially bad, but can't evidence why.

The problem is extremist behaviour and that's a problem no matter what religion it is associated with.

If you want to have a sensible discussion about the how and the why of Islamic religious extremism, then we can do that. The issues however, are way more complicated than just pointing at the Qu'ran and saying "muslims bad!"


and the only comment I made when Thomas started on his ranting

I have not ranted about anything Peter.

Peter Brown wrote:about other religions was this is a subsection on Islam, take it elsewhere stop derailing the topic on mosques, which isn't a topic about churches or any other hall of woo.

And I've explained, multiple times, that it is very much on topic as it goes to the conistency of your position.
That you continue to pretend this hasn't been explained to you only serves to reinforce that you've no interest in a rational discussion.

Peter Brown wrote:If you can't talk about Islam

Virtually everyone in this thread, including myself, has talked about Islam.

Peter Brown wrote:, then ask questions,

Nope Peter, you don't get to dictate the content of other people's posts.

Peter Brown wrote: but don't get insulting

This is the umpteenth time you've asserted that people have insulted you.
I've asked you, several times, to quote people insulting or attacking you.
Your failure to demonstrate this demonstrates that this is yet another disengenuous appeal to persecution.

Peter Brown wrote: and dismissive as some here have done when Islamic quotes are returned.

Except we haven't been merely dismissive. We've explained why those quotes are not a sound basis to dismiss the entire muslim population/close mosques.

Peter Brown wrote: Or it will be no wonder when off topic messages are ignored, they deserve to be ignored. My crime has been not ignoring more of them.

No your crime is this disengenuous dismissal in an attempt to hide the fact that you cannot adress the points being made.

Peter Brown wrote:
Basically, you can condemn christanity on exactly the same basis that you condemn islam. So why choose one over the other?


and because this is always the same sad tune I'll shout it again in bigger bold stand out type

IT IS A ISLAM SECTION NOT A ALL RELIGION SUB SECTION

Mindlessly shouting your position does not make it sound or true Peter.
It's perfectly fair and on topic to draw comparisons between Islam and other religions when it serves to point out the flaws in your arguments.

Peter Brown wrote:But I basically disagree with the premice all religions are the same,

Sendraks has made no such claim. Stop with this asinine straw-man Peter.

Peter Brown wrote:that really is a false claim

Hence why no-one has made as has been pointed out to you.

Peter Brown wrote: which I've seen used to excuse a religion doing bad shit with the smoke screen of all are the same.
Muslims and Christians hate gays, but Islam says kill from high hights, Moses says stone them, whatever and Christianity love the sinner not the sinner, aand that makes all three the same. Jog on.

Since they all claim to obey the same god, yes in that sense they are the same as it is the same god that says stone them.
And it's already been explained to you that 'hate the sin, not the sinner', is a disengenuous platitude that draws a distinction where there is none.

Peter Brown wrote:And I know damn well the people who use this slight of debating hand tactic are hypocrits because in the next paragraph they say, not all Muslims are the same are they. Well when is a Muslim not a Muslim, a Christian not a Christian? When they don't follow the Muhammads example if a Muslim or Jesus if a Christian I'd say, so why isn't that acceptable as a discription and a straw man.

off to walk the dog

FFS Peter, the only person in this thread who keeps making asinine No True Scotsman fallacies is you.