.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to Murph.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="Murph:1033391"]France can only blame itself for getting into this mess in the first place. Their treatment of Algeria and subsequent backtrack and scramble has really caused an odd menage of culture, with a gigantic influx of Algerian Muslims having emigrated to France in the '50s to the present. Of that population, I'm sure plenty are more tame Islamic followers, but, its simple math: more of a given population leads to a greater chance of radicals (who "ruin" it for the rest, even though I think all three of the Abrahamic faiths are fucking retarded). People tend to forget how scared to shit people have been in history of Christian sects due to their brutality. Jews struck fear in their own ways during Roman occupation to the present day. Sure, we live in a modern world, but terrorism is terrorism, whether it's in religious form or not. People also tend to forget that the Qu'ran is an extremely vitriolic book, open to interpretation. As is the Old Testament, and as is much of the New. Unfortunately for its own sake, it tends to be that Muslims and Jews are a bit more schooled in the basic tenets of their faith, whereas Christianity has many gray areas, instilled in a religion that completed mass conversion of populations in a rather small amount of time (when weighed upon the understood span of the human race since the first dawn of dogma), and a greater palatability. Muslims and Jews also have more ties with a sense of culture and race, especially with Judaism’s claim to be an "ethnoreligious" entity (which of course is impossible and limiting) which make them afraid of eradication, and the populace more skeptical of their motives. To be frank, the West is much more timid of the world's Muslims than Jews, so no surprise. People can take all the humanistic and moral value from their Abrahamic faith view, but it is still going to leave an amount of limiting substance written at a particular time, for a particular survival. IT’S MEANT THAT WAY, THAT’S WHY IT EXISTS. My only concern in the complete removal of faith-based materials from the state is the fact that we AS HUMANS lose out on experiencing documents crucial to the evolution of humanity (the Bible, Qu'ran, Tanakh, Talmud...etc). Personally, I think American public schools should offer (not require) classes in understanding such texts in a literary aspect, because they are, after all, HISTORICAL TEXTS. Referencing your argument, are the issues with the Mexican flag in the south about it being flown in government or state buildings, or in personal use? If it is personal use, than I can see the relevance as it is personal expression (like the burka) and since we aren't engaged in any conflicts on the surface with Mexico it would be in bad taste to legislate against, but if not, I agree with the State's rights to remove a flag from state/govn't property...this isn't Mexico, nor any other nation. Is the whole thing fair? Probably not. Muslims and Christians whine all the time about their treatment...what did they really think was gonna happen when their power started to dissolve? In the ever-present need to be relevant, fringe elements go apeshit, and of course they are the ones in the papers making the headlines. OH WELL. [/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.015 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][