So..... Muhammad was a pedofile

[Glockmatic]

The bold part, who is that according to?

Look up apostasy and the punishment for it for the different religions. Saudi Arabia has apostasy in its list of crimes punishable by death, and their law is based on the Sharia law.

 

[Jurhum]

I dont really understand why this discussion is still going. It's almost as if you guys are using it as an excuse to take shots at each other.

You probably might have heard this quote which goes like this, A great scholar once said, "I debated scholars and defeated them, then I debated an ignorant and he defeated me."

That's where I am. I was up to debate their claims, but all I've seen from them was insults to the Prophet. So, I realised that no matter what, their arrogance has literally crippled their ability to discuss the matter at hand.

 

[Rukas]

You probably might have heard this quote which goes like this, A great scholar once said, "I debated scholars and defeated them, then I debated an ignorant and he defeated me."

That's where I am. I was up to debate their claims, but all I've seen from them was insults to the Prophet. So, I realised that no matter what, their arrogance has literally crippled their ability to discuss the matter at hand.

The definition of "scholar" is "a learned person (especially in the humanities); someone who by long study has gained mastery in one or more disciplines."

The definition of "ignorant" is "lacking in knowledge or education; unenlightened."

Now, who fits the term scholar more? You? Who believes a culture from 1600 years ago is correct? Or we who believe humanity needs to socially and culturally evolve? You who thinks murder for gaining knowledge or discussion is acceptable? Or we who look to science and discovery to progress our knowledge, education and outlook on life? You who believe pedophilia is condonable? Or we who know that it can NEVER be, not even by a Prophet. Who is educated? You who thinks that a female can reach puberty at 9 years old? Or science and psychiatrists, of which we read, studies that clearly show she can not? You who gains ALL of his knowledge on science, morals, society, humanity, biology, etc, from one biased, blind and factually incorrect source written 1600 years ago? Or we who look to many sources, logic, and the world around us for answers?

And now who is ignorant? Who lacks knowledge? Who is unenlightened? You who gets all of his facts from an in factual and outdated book, written during the times of a barbaric society and culture who has no place in modern society? You who finds excuses in this source for pedophilia, statutory rape, murder, torture, genocide, etc etc? Or we? We who want peace? We who just want EVERYONE to be equal in society, no special rights for any one, any race, or any religion?

Even ImmortalTech, whom I consider an enlightened Muslim man, knows how ignorant you are. Don't try to claim some moral high ground, you can barely hold a footing when it comes to morals.

You, low brow outdated small man.

We, people of 2010 and beyond.

 

[Casey]

The definition of "scholar" is "a learned person (especially in the humanities); someone who by long study has gained mastery in one or more disciplines."

The definition of "ignorant" is "lacking in knowledge or education; unenlightened."

Now, who fits the term scholar more? You? Who believes a culture from 1600 years ago is correct? Or we who believe humanity needs to socially and culturally evolve? You who thinks murder for gaining knowledge or discussion is acceptable? Or we who look to science and discovery to progress our knowledge, education and outlook on life? You who believe pedophilia is condonable? Or we who know that it can NEVER be, not even by a Prophet. Who is educated? You who thinks that a female can reach puberty at 9 years old? Or science and psychiatrists, of which we read, studies that clearly show she can not? You who gains ALL of his knowledge on science, morals, society, humanity, biology, etc, from one biased, blind and factually incorrect source written 1600 years ago? Or we who look to many sources, logic, and the world around us for answers?

And now who is ignorant? Who lacks knowledge? Who is unenlightened? You who gets all of his facts from an in factual and outdated book, written during the times of a barbaric society and culture who has no place in modern society? You who finds excuses in this source for pedophilia, statutory rape, murder, torture, genocide, etc etc? Or we? We who want peace? We who just want EVERYONE to be equal in society, no special rights for any one, any race, or any religion?

Even ImmortalTech, whom I consider an enlightened Muslim man, knows how ignorant you are. Don't try to claim some moral high ground, you can barely hold a footing when it comes to morals.

You, low brow outdated small man.

We, people of 2010 and beyond.

I was wrong. THIS is the Post of the fucking year. Or decade.

LMFAO at Jurhum pulling out a quote about scholars and ignorance when a blind man could see that he is the most ignorant person in this entire thread by a MILE, and clearly completely uneducated.

 

[Duke]

You probably might have heard this quote which goes like this, A great scholar once said, "I debated scholars and defeated them, then I debated an ignorant and he defeated me."

That's where I am. I was up to debate their claims, but all I've seen from them was insults to the Prophet. So, I realised that no matter what, their arrogance has literally crippled their ability to discuss the matter at hand.

You choose to focus on those posts. There's been plenty of opportunity to debate it normally.

I'm still waiting for the answer to my question, btw. If a muslim preacher preached something that would offend me to the deepest of my soul, am I justified in killing him, yes or no?

 

[Jurhum]

The definition of "scholar" is "a learned person (especially in the humanities); someone who by long study has gained mastery in one or more disciplines."

The definition of "ignorant" is "lacking in knowledge or education; unenlightened."

Now, who fits the term scholar more? You? Who believes a culture from 1600 years ago is correct? Or we who believe humanity needs to socially and culturally evolve? You who thinks murder for gaining knowledge or discussion is acceptable? Or we who look to science and discovery to progress our knowledge, education and outlook on life? You who believe pedophilia is condonable? Or we who know that it can NEVER be, not even by a Prophet. Who is educated? You who thinks that a female can reach puberty at 9 years old? Or science and psychiatrists, of which we read, studies that clearly show she can not? You who gains ALL of his knowledge on science, morals, society, humanity, biology, etc, from one biased, blind and factually incorrect source written 1600 years ago? Or we who look to many sources, logic, and the world around us for answers?

And now who is ignorant? Who lacks knowledge? Who is unenlightened? You who gets all of his facts from an in factual and outdated book, written during the times of a barbaric society and culture who has no place in modern society? You who finds excuses in this source for pedophilia, statutory rape, murder, torture, genocide, etc etc? Or we? We who want peace? We who just want EVERYONE to be equal in society, no special rights for any one, any race, or any religion?

Even ImmortalTech, whom I consider an enlightened Muslim man, knows how ignorant you are. Don't try to claim some moral high ground, you can barely hold a footing when it comes to morals.

You, low brow outdated small man.

We, people of 2010 and beyond.

See! This is what I am talking about. But, I'll be the better person as usual and ignore the ignorant. I'm better than this. As a poet once said, "If a coward insults me, It only gives me reason to feel better. And, if my soul wasn't so dear to me, I'd enable it to fight every coward."

 

[Jurhum]

You choose to focus on those posts. There's been plenty of opportunity to debate it normally.

I'm still waiting for the answer to my question, btw. If a muslim preacher preached something that would offend me to the deepest of my soul, am I justified in killing him, yes or no?

Is that Muslim preacher violating your rights in anyway? Has he insulted you?

 

[vg4030]

Does not change the fact that you are gay.

Your wife is just a cover-up for your gayness. :lol:

See! This is what I am talking about. But, I'll be the better person as usual and ignore the ignorant. I'm better than this. As a poet once said, "If a coward insults me, It only gives me reason to feel better. And, if my soul wasn't so dear to me, I'd enable it to fight every coward."

Dude, that last quote would be much more compelling if it wasnt for the first 2 :thumb:

 

[Duke]

Is that Muslim preacher violating your rights in anyway? Has he insulted you?

He has insulted me with his what he preaches and by how his followers pubically verbalize those opinions, yes.

He has not violated my rights, no.

 

[Cooper]

I'm starting to see Jurham as a parody. He can't seriously be like this, right?

 

[Jurhum]

He has insulted me with his what he preaches and by how his followers pubically verbalize those opinions, yes.

He has not violated my rights, no.

Well, I see it like this, If he has not violated your rights, you don't have the right to harm him. His opinions are his. Plus, you can go to the authorities if you think he has done anything that breaks the law.

 

[Jurhum]

I'm starting to see Jurham as a parody. He can't seriously be like this, right?

A parody? Nah, I dont bother to answer anything Rukas or caisy pain post. They are on an Islamic bashing spree.

 

[Jurhum]

Dude, that last quote would be much more compelling if it wasnt for the first 2 :thumb:

Yeah, you skipped his though?

 

[Preach]

Referring to Jurhum as a parody and then using his previous outbursts against him out of context. He said those things because he was directly slandered. He didn't start it, it was his response to someone being unreasonable and directly attacking his belief. We can all pretend humans don't have pride; that that is not programmed in us. Fine, lie to yourself to win an argument for no other sake than your own satisfaction of "owning" someone. Jurhum's actions make perfect sense, you just don't understand where he is coming from because you (many of you) are being simpletons even though you have capacity to be something more. You seem to think his anger has to do with being proven wrong, when in fact it's more that some of you are being dicks.

I think this whole thread is unreasonable because it started out offensive, and it carries on being offensive. You/we are all systematically trying to break down a person's belief system.

One might be under the understanding that it's better to give up religion because it opens your mind, but it has to happen at free will, and you can't force the process.



I have a friend who swears to God. He isn't Christian, but he believes in God. He believes in a higher power that is sentient, and he believes that life is but one aspect of the universe. Well okay, his dad died when he was young. Then like last week, a bunch of people at work started doing the same thing. Systematically asking questions that put him in a position where he didn't have an answer. He's not gonna change. His father died. If there is no God, no afterlife, nothing other than what we can see and feel, then maybe an infantile desire to see his father again is what's keeping his faith. It may not be his reasoning for believing right now, but it definitely has something to do with what he chooses to believe in.

So in essence, the people at work were picking on a person who has a hard time dealing with reality, and ended up belittling him in front of everybody by crushing his notion of faith with the notion of facts and science.

What's going on in this thread is pretty pathetic to me. I don't care if it's all under the guise of freedom of speech, liberty, or that believing in Santa Clause is unhealthy. It's not your life so shut the fuck up or be respectful and understanding. Don't be so god damn personal when you make your points about why you think Islam is a bad thing. They didn't do shit to YOU.

 

[Duke]

Well, I see it like this, If he has not violated your rights, you don't have the right to harm him. His opinions are his. Plus, you can go to the authorities if you think he has done anything that breaks the law.

How have the Danish cartoonists violated the rights of muslims then? Are their opinions not theirs?

 

[Duke]

Referring to Jurhum as a parody and then using his previous outbursts against him out of context. He said those things because he was directly slandered. He didn't start it, it was his response to someone being unreasonable and directly attacking his belief. We can all pretend humans don't have pride; that that is not programmed in us. Fine, lie to yourself to win an argument for no other sake than your own satisfaction of "owning" someone. Jurhum's actions make perfect sense, you just don't understand where he is coming from because you (many of you) are being simpletons even though you have capacity to be something more.

I think this whole thread is unreasonable because it started out offensive, and it carries on being offensive. You/we are all systematically trying to break down a person's belief system.

One might be under the understanding that it's better to give up religion because it opens your mind, but it has to happen at free will, and you can't force the process.



I have a friend who swears to God. He isn't Christian, but he believes in God. He believes in a higher power that is sentient, and he believes that life is but one aspect of the universe. Well okay, his dad died when he was young. Then like last week, a bunch of people at work started doing the same thing. Systematically asking questions that put him in a position where he didn't have an answer. He's not gonna change. His father died. If there is no God, no afterlife, nothing other than what we can see and feel, then maybe an infantile desire to see his father again is what's keeping his faith. It may not be his reasoning for believing right now, but it definitely has something to do with what he chooses to believe in.

So in essence, the people at work were picking on a person who has a hard time dealing with reality, and ended up belittling him in front of everybody by crushing his notion of faith with the notion of facts and science.

What's going on in this thread is pretty pathetic to me. I don't care if it's all under the guide of freedom of speech, liberty, that believing in Santa Clause is unhealthy. It's not your life so shut the fuck up or be respectful and understanding.

Don't be stupid. The underlying issue here is that the way some people want to live their life directly impact the society they live in in a negative way.

 

[S O F I]

^Don't nit-pick .

I don't agree with Preach's last two sentences, but I generally agree with what he said.

 

[Preach]

Don't be stupid. The underlying issue here is that the way some people want to live their life directly impact the society they live in in a negative way.

* Any "you" in this following post is directed at everyone that my previous post was directed at*

The way many westerners live their life proves the same problem. Look at crime statistics lol. If you count all Muslims, and then count all the Muslims that blew themselves up, then count all Westerners, then count all the bad shit they did, the statistics are no different. If you look at daily practice then yes, things happen in Muslim countries that are bad, but it's not the individual Muslim, and certainly not Jurhum who is responsible for it. Yet you focus your anger with whatever mischief Muslims are guilty of on the one Muslim you currently can; Jurhum. Another argument is that Islam encourages violence more so than other religions, but that's a simplification and shutting your eye to another important aspect of why things are the way they are in the middle east: Social evolution. Just like we no longer go on crusades and holy war, most Muslims don't practice Jihad. They don't do things EXACTLY the way they did 200 years ago. They, too, are on a path of evolution. It's just a differing path to ours. They do not all hate the infidel dog.

But yeah. The discussion on religion is okay and interesting. The calling Jurhum a parody and forcing him to admit what you consider is bullshit, that is not as okay and interesting imo. You are cornering an animal and that has an instinctive reaction. Ie. calling Casey a fag.

 

[Jurhum]

How have the Danish cartoonists violated the rights of muslims then? Are their opinions not theirs?

Well, it's hard to explain if you don't really see it. Insulting someone means you've directly attacked that person. Have you seen Muslims riot against anyone making crazy cartoons of Osama bin laden? Insulting Osama bin laden? Of course not. We can accept any ridicule to any person living right now. However, we will never accept any insults to the prophet. As I said, being a Muslim is more than just a spiritual feeling. You follow a way of life form A to Z. Everything in Islam teaches you how to live your life. From sleeping to waking up to entering the bathroom to existing etc. It's not just a simple I believe in God or Allah and that's it.

It's way more than that. Muslims cherish and love the prophet more than their own families. And, insulting him in that way is extremely unacceptable and poses as a direct attack to the core beliefs of Islam.

As many have said, is it really freedom of speech when the intention is to provoke more than 1 billion people world wide? Why is freedom of speech more precious than freedom of religion?

Do I have to insult anyone to make a point? Do I have to pick on a certain group to make a point? No. I can exercise freedom of expression without insulting religion.

The funny part is, rukas and casy rain speak about how they want a better world for everyone. Yet, go out of their way to intentionally insult Muslims for god knows what reason.

How can they even claim superiority over me when their actions wreak of hatred.

 

[Sebastian]

Referring to Jurhum as a parody and then using his previous outbursts against him out of context. He said those things because he was directly slandered. He didn't start it, it was his response to someone being unreasonable and directly attacking his belief. We can all pretend humans don't have pride; that that is not programmed in us. Fine, lie to yourself to win an argument for no other sake than your own satisfaction of "owning" someone. Jurhum's actions make perfect sense, you just don't understand where he is coming from because you (many of you) are being simpletons even though you have capacity to be something more. You seem to think his anger has to do with being proven wrong, when in fact it's more that some of you are being dicks.

First of all, and i think ive said it before in this thread, i do think the way the thread was started for example, was done in a wrong way. The intention was clearly a provocative and insulting one. Thats what SOFI said somewhere in here too, that you got to be careful about the way things like that are being handled. Not just when it comes to religion and faith, but to everything else too.

I think this whole thread is unreasonable because it started out offensive, and it carries on being offensive. You/we are all systematically trying to break down a person's belief system.

One might be under the understanding that it's better to give up religion because it opens your mind, but it has to happen at free will, and you can't force the process.

Now saying that "you cant force the process" is definitely not true. Of course you can. If you bring something to someones attention it might help to open ones eyes for a different kind of perspective. Just like you trying to explain, that there is another way of dealing with circumstances which might be strange to us. To confront a person in a discussion, for example, is a way of raising someones attention.

I have a friend who swears to God. He isn't Christian, but he believes in God. He believes in a higher power that is sentient, and he believes that life is but one aspect of the universe. Well okay, his dad died when he was young. Then like last week, a bunch of people at work started doing the same thing. Systematically asking questions that put him in a position where he didn't have an answer. He's not gonna change. His father died. If there is no God, no afterlife, nothing other than what we can see and feel, then maybe an infantile desire to see his father again is what's keeping his faith. It may not be his reasoning for believing right now, but it definitely has something to do with what he chooses to believe in.

So in essence, the people at work were picking on a person who has a hard time dealing with reality, and ended up belittling him in front of everybody by crushing his notion of faith with the notion of facts and science.

Again, im repeating what i already said before: I do think its morally wrong to behave in the way the people in your example did. This person is not harming anybody by believing in god. So there is absolutely no reason to force him to get into this kind of discussion and maybe even ridicule him.

What's going on in this thread is pretty pathetic to me. I don't care if it's all under the guise of freedom of speech, liberty, or that believing in Santa Clause is unhealthy. It's not your life so shut the fuck up or be respectful and understanding. Don't be so god damn personal when you make your points about why you think Islam is a bad thing. They didn't do shit to YOU.

Now this part is debatable. First of all i think its you who is wrong, when you dont find some of the things at least offensive and moronic (and in the bigger picture even dangerous) that Jurhum has said in here.

It doesnt always have to affect my life own directly, to feel emotional about something. When i watch the news and hear about a group of teenagers attacking and old men over some stupid shit, i get angry and deep inside i would like to put a bullet in their heads.

Now when i read some of Jurhums comments and think that in some parts of the world, a huge amount of people have to suffer (in different kind of ways) because of this backwards thinking, i do get angry too.