Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Sweetheart", I'm not Roman Catholic. I do believe that stories of that kind in the Roman Catholic Church are over emphesized and used by the Christophobes to bash Christianity.
I DO believe priests should be allowed to marry and that would solve a lot of the problems. The pope's move to ban priest marriage was a money grab, plain and simple. At the time most priests were younger sons of nobles. They were peopel who stood to inherit nothing because the oldest son got it all. Well, you can't have a nobleman's sone begging in the streets so the priesthood became the perfect place for them.
Of course, sometimes those elder sons died before they had children and then the younger son, now a priest was very wealthy. If they had no sons they naturally would end up giving it all to the church. Money grab, plain and simple. Again, I'm not Roman Catholic.
Just so we're clear here -- McVeigh was NOT a Christian. He was agnostic and said "Science is my religion".
What was Kathy Griffin's line: The priest barely touched those boys.
You sound naive to say, "those stories were over emphasized and used to bash Christianity". This is why the priest can rape/molest boys over and over and over again. The thinking of people like you. Those seductive little boys.
Just so we're clear, I could careless who's marrying whom. Priest marrying doesn't have anything to do with pedophilia. A guy marrying a woman and he like boys is lying to himself.
My point exactly. Someone other than Islamic bombing this great land of ours.
The Middle East is not the only region of the world where Islam is practiced or has spread to.
The 3 countries with the largest Muslim populations in the world are in Asia, not the Middle East.
Quote:
Genocide has happened in Darfur and Nigeria over Islam. In the Philippines "radical islam" has taken over Mindanao and the result has been bloody. Southeast Asia has a significant Muslim presence.
Without Islam (especially) as a factor in politics I am sure the world would be a better place.
European colonialism's legacy is a major factor and would be a factor even if there was no Islam. There has been plenty of bloodshed spilled in Africa over ethnic conflicts due to the arbitrary drawing up of borders by the 19th century colonial powers even in parts of Africa where Islam isn't practiced.
The only major conflicts that would not exist AT ALL if there was no Islam would be those relating to Pakistan which stem from the partition of India.
The Middle East is not the only region of the world where Islam is practiced or has spread to.
Genocide has happened in Darfur and Nigeria over Islam. In the Philippines "radical islam" has taken over Mindanao and the result has been bloody. Southeast Asia has a significant Muslim presence.
Without Islam (especially) as a factor in politics I am sure the world would be a better place.
The problem is that there are genocides,wars, and bad things in all countries, and have been over time. Which suggests that there events aren't caused by Islam. So, given that these events aren't caused by Islam, the question comes to what affect that Islam has, and why you believe it.
I disagree about the Israeli puppet-masters. You've been reading too much conspiricy theory if you believe that. If there reallt were Israeli puppet-masters there would be a couple of really big holes in Iran now, instead of a nuclear weapons program going full speed ahead.
It's not a "theory", conspiracy or otherwise. It is commonly acknowledged that AIPAC is not only the most influential foreign lobby in Washington--grooming and buying politicians from the state legislature level all the way up the ladder--but that there is no comparable group even in the game.
As for the 'holes' in Iran, Israel could do that themselves if they felt it in their interest. They don't need us for that, just for diplomatic cover in the UN and more billions in assistance every year.
The 3 countries with the largest Muslim populations in the world are in Asia, not the Middle East.
European colonialism's legacy is a major factor and would be a factor even if there was no Islam. There has been plenty of bloodshed spilled in Africa over ethnic conflicts due to the arbitrary drawing up of borders by the 19th century colonial powers even in parts of Africa where Islam isn't practiced.
The only major conflicts that would not exist AT ALL if there was no Islam would be those relating to Pakistan which stem from the partition of India.
So you deny the part Islam has played in the genocide in Darfur, and also in Nigeria and simply want to pass it off as the result of colonialism. I don't need to go back to the 19th century to justify my comments about what Islam is doing in 2010 it's as plain as the nose on your face.
The problem is that there are genocides,wars, and bad things in all countries, and have been over time. Which suggests that there events aren't caused by Islam. So, given that these events aren't caused by Islam, the question comes to what affect that Islam has, and why you believe it.
I guess it's easy to justify the violence that Muslims are creating in the name of Islam against innocent people by stating that there's genocides and wars and conflicts in all countries.
Sure. If it makes you feel better then believe that.
Probably the only corner of the world that Islam hasn't infected yet is North Korea.
So you deny the part Islam has played in the genocide in Darfur, and also in Nigeria and simply want to pass it off as the result of colonialism. I don't need to go back to the 19th century to justify my comments about what Islam is doing in 2010 it's as plain as the nose on your face.
Sudan and Nigeria are artificial countries whose borders were drawn up by the European colonial powers and which should never have existed as nations. The borders should have been drawn according to the existing peoples' wishes, many of whom had feuds going back centuries.
Re: Darfur:
"Various sources have claimed it is a war waged by Muslim Arabs against Christian and Animist black Africans. However, this distinction is not always true as many of the victims of the atrocities in Darfur were also Muslim (albeit not Arab). The conflict's origin goes back to land disputes between semi-nomadic livestock herders and those who practice sedentary agriculture.
"The actual conflict is not only about race or religion, but about resources as the nomadic tribes facing drought are going after the territory of sedentary farmers."
I guess it's easy to justify the violence that Muslims are creating in the name of Islam against innocent people by stating that there's genocides and wars and conflicts in all countries.
Sure. If it makes you feel better then believe that.
Probably the only corner of the world that Islam hasn't infected yet is North Korea.
It come back to the nature of the problem, and thus solution.
It's important strategically to identify what/who your fighting against.
Your argument is that Islam causes war, and yet war exists without Islam. Which proves that there are other causes of war. In fact there appear in Muslim countries to be many non-Islamic causes of wars, like territory, colonialism, resources.
To make your claim, therefore, you have to prove a causal link between Islam and wars, and explain the mechanism via which Islam does it.
So, to be clear, to progress, state your argument clearly, state what you think Islam does clearly, and state how you think it does it clearly. Explain why you think traditional geo-strategic logic doesn't apply.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.