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.
The issue is that Obama has a problem with using the worlds "Islamic terrorist", but DOESN'T having a problem saying "terrible deeds were committed in the name of Christ"--it's a double standard that makes him look like an idiot. If you want to leave religion out of terrorism, fine, but you'd better do it for ALL religions, not just Islam.
ISIS is the beneficiary when people/ media portray ISIS as Islam/ all Muslims. Nothing would delight them more to have the West to declare Islam, the enemy.
There's a particularly barbaric terrorist cell in Africa that goes by the name of The Lord's Resistance Army, a Protestant sect. They make ISIS look like a bunch of pansies. Should all Protestants or Christians be labeled as terrorists because this group uses a twisted interpretation of religion to justify their actions?
Never heard of them.
This is a protestant sect?
"Ideologically, LRA believe in African mysticism and Christian fundamentalism.[15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25] It claims to be establishing a theocratic state based on the Ten Commandments and local Acholi tradition."
Sounds like the "African mysticism" and "local Acholi traditions" trump the Ten Commandments in their religion, but hey, their just a Protestant sect like Methodists or something.
The fact that this has been an issue or question for weeks is astonishing. ISIS, the radicals etc. are taking over cities, burning people, and we're wrestling with what to call them. Can you imagine this in WWII? "We'll, we really can't say Germans because we have a lot of people here that came from Germany and there are people that have moved all over Europe from Germany that aren't represented by these people." A leader defines the problem and creates a plan. ISIS, or whatever you call them, has no concerns about us and it doesn't look like they have any reason to. We're clearly not committed. If that's the plan, then say that, but the anguish about what you call them is ridiculous. Pick something, go with it and stop the other nonsense to avoid upsetting anyone's feelings.
The issue is that Obama has a problem with using the worlds "Islamic terrorist", but DOESN'T having a problem saying "terrible deeds were committed in the name of Christ"--it's a double standard that makes him look like an idiot. If you want to leave religion out of terrorism, fine, but you'd better do it for ALL religions, not just Islam.
Its like that Seinfeld episode where the dentist became a Jew so he could tell people Jewish jokes. Or like black people being able to use the n. word, while white people can't use the n. word.
Its not a double standard its just how the world works. Black Christian Obama can use the n. word and say negative things about Christians (but he can't say REALLY bad things about Jews or Muslims.)
Example, Obama could say the following in public and it would be OK, but if a white person said it they would be attacked. And its not just about black people, it applies to Christians, Jews, Muslims, ex.ex.
His administration has no problem using the qualifier "Christian" when talking about extremists though. One of his flunkies called The Lord's Resistance Army CHRISTIAN militants!!!!
Its like that Seinfeld episode where the dentist became a Jew so he could tell people Jewish jokes. Or like black people being able to use the n. word, while white people can't use the n. word.
Its not a double standard its just how the world works. Black Christian Obama can use the n. word and say negative things about Christians (but he can't say REALLY bad things about Jews or Muslims.)
Example, Obama could say the following in public and it would be OK, but if a white person said it they would be attacked. And its not just about black people, it applies to Christians, Jews, Muslims, ex.ex.
What causes this? Perhaps respect?
So, Obama could say radical Islam or Muslim terrorists if he were a Muslim ? The rationales get nuttier and nuttier.
It's funny how Obama refuses to mention "Islam" when referring to terrorists/extremists/extremism/terrorism, but on the other hand he refers to the group as a whole as "ISIL". What does he think the "I" stands for?? Independent???
What's funny is that you're calling Obama a hypocrite for violating the imagined lingual standard that you, a person on the internet, have projected onto him.
When we have had a national conversation for weeks about making sure we outline who the enemy is not, it doesn't inspire great confidence in the leadership.
Imagine someone saying "Radical Christians" or "Christian terrorists", some Christians would be upset by that. Obama/liberals are trying to stop more Muslims from hating us (and wanting to kill us.)
Liberals are also trying to bring out normal Muslim priests who do not want to kill non-Muslims. But conservatives could care less about not insulting Muslims, or bringing out Muslim priests who do not want to kill people. Instead conservatives want to insult Muslims and then say "lets kick their as-es."
And I would be partly with conservatives on this, except in the near future these terrorists will have biological weapons (and I don't want biological weapons being released around my family, or around your family.)
Chad.
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.
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.
