250,000 Muslims being brought to US Soil? Is this true?

[talisman]

He was talking about the France and Germany in Africa, though.

[BradM]

You had me Bowl!

Don't vape though, that would be E-bowling and I'm pretty sure that would make your head explode.

[VaderTT]

Specifically the two countries you mentioned. Yeah, go smoke a bowl. That's exactly what a paranoid retard needs.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-28755033

Way to jump to name calling, you crossfit faggot.

[ELVIS]

Way to jump to name calling, you crossfit faggot.

Like.

God bless.

[racrguy]

Like.

God bless.

Seconded.

[Nash B.]

Man, I wish there were a way to subscribe to Seb's posts.

[Gasser64]

I agree. So, basically, it's not sharia that you have a problem with. It's a few of it's tenets. Sounds a lot like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Its really hard to argue that point when Islam makes it pretty clear that its all about "kill anyone who disagrees" and christianity seems to be more about "love thy neighbor" or some sh1t. Again im not religious but i think I get the gist of it. I would think its pretty obvious, one was started by evil warlord, one was started by a guy who sacrificed himself for others. Now one dont quite belong does it?

I don't see any of that here. I only see the people you claim are "leftys" opposing your ignorance, and resultant bigotry, as a justification of your position. What I disagree with is your position that the problem is islam, and not individual muslims yet, when christians to crazy things in the name of christianity, you'll gladly claim it's just some disturbed individuals and not the religion at fault. From what I can tell, that's the only thing anyone has argued with you about in this thread. I must congratulate you on your strawman, though. I'm sure a lot of people would think you made a valid point when you knocked it over.

This is a typical lefty argument and if you dont see any of that here then we probably dont have much of a reason to converse. You like to throw around the term 'bigot" as if it helps your argument somehow. Well by your apparent definition of the word Im a bigot and proud of it. I am certainly bigoted against the aforementioned actions and also against any organization that would approve of them. If you want to make this about some kind of skin color thing, then thats on you. Cause it has nothing to do with me. Im familiar with the assertion a fellow at work is always throwing that at me and other people. that we must be some kind of bigots because we dont like certain ideas that he holds dear.

If i claim its disturbed individuals when it comes to christianity, it would be because theyre not following their own religion lol. Im not trying to insult you but if you can make that kind of comparison then you have no idea about christianity. Whereas with islam, these actions are promoted in the religion. In christainity they are condemned. Thats pretty much that. Thats like a cop going on a shooting spree and saying he was acting within the boundaries of the law. He can say anything he wants but it will never make it the truth. Same with the disturbed individuals and their holy books.

[SS Junk]

Seconded.

thirded

[Maddhattter]

Its really hard to argue that point when Islam makes it pretty clear that its all about "kill anyone who disagrees" and christianity seems to be more about "love thy neighbor" or some sh1t. Again im not religious but i think I get the gist of it.

Islam is no more "kill anyone who disagrees" than christianity is.

I would think its pretty obvious, one was started by evil warlord, one was started by a guy who sacrificed himself for others. Now one dont quite belong does it?

Considering there's no evidence any of that actually happened, and the 'evil warlord' title is only given due to your bigotry, I think it's pretty clear that you don't think at all.

For the sake of argument, even if we were to accept your claims as true, just because the person who started the religion claims, or is thought, to believe something has no bearing on the truth, validity, or morality of the religion itself. It's a clear cut genetic fallacy.

This is a typical lefty argument

If arguing with facts when only ignorance and emotional pleading is presented is a "lefty" argument, I'll accept that label.

and if you dont see any of that here then we probably dont have much of a reason to converse.

As none of our conversation has been a disagreement about opposition to opposing "mutilating peoples genitals, cutting off peoples heads and hands, suicide bombing people, etc etc insert crime against humanity here",we seem to have much to converse about.

You like to throw around the term 'bigot" as if it helps your argument somehow.

No, I don't. I used the term once and only when explaining what was being argued against. I did not "throw around the term",I use the word as it is defined.

Well by your apparent definition of the word Im a bigot and proud of it.

No, by the definition of the word, you are a bigot and your pride in that is unsurprising. Virtually all bigots are proud of that fact.

I am certainly bigoted against the aforementioned actions and also against any organization that would approve of them.

You're clearly not when you keep excusing christianity of supporting the same behaviors.

If you want to make this about some kind of skin color thing, then thats on you. Cause it has nothing to do with me.

So, we'll add 'Reading Comprehension' to the growing list of things you're not capable of.

I never stated, nor implied, that your bigotry had anything to do with the color of anyone's skin. At least it's not often I see red herrings.

Im familiar with the assertion a fellow at work is always throwing that at me and other people. that we must be some kind of bigots because we dont like certain ideas that he holds dear.

So, first of all, your anecdote is irrelevant. Why should I, or anyone else, care that you claim someone at your work is calling you a bigot? How does that pertain to anything?

Second of all, based on your own statement, you are a bigot and you're proud of it. So, I don't see how this story is problematic.

Finally, who is "we"? Who else are you trying to drag down with you?

If i claim its disturbed individuals when it comes to christianity, it would be because theyre not following their own religion lol.

Then you'd know that christians clearly don't follow their own religion as a their book tells it. That's why the small number of "disturbed" individuals in any religious groups are known as fundamentalists. They are the ones that follow their religion to the letter, and they are denounced by the greater majority of their fellows because of their atrocious behavior. Yet, you don't do this. You keep trying to give christianity an out by way of applying a different set of criteria to christianity and claiming that those aren't "true" christians or those people aren't following their religion.

Im not trying to insult you

No worries, I doubt you're capable.

but if you can make that kind of comparison then you have no idea about christianity.

Incorrect. Just because you're not aware of what the bible actually teaches and/or encourages, doesn't make the comparison false.

For example, even Jesus said he did not come to bring peace, but a sword. He also condemns the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." Which god clearly agrees with seeing as he murdered 42 children for calling Elisha bald. Or how about when David bought his wife with 200 Philistine foreskins, even though the asking price was only 100? Oh, those christians, with their ""love thy neighbor" or some sh1t".

Whereas with islam, these actions are promoted in the religion. In christainity they are condemned. Thats pretty much that. Thats like a cop going on a shooting spree and saying he was acting within the boundaries of the law. He can say anything he wants but it will never make it the truth.

Much like your attempt to shoehorn the idea that laws are based on christian morality, you are wrong here. I'll agree that the majority of christians condemn this behavior. Christianity does not. Much like how the majority of muslims condemn these behaviors, while islam does not.

Same with the disturbed individuals and their holy books.

Except in this post, you've demonstrated that you don't hold all groups to the same standards.

Also, I'm inclined to ask... Why do you keep bringing up that you're "not religious"? Thus far, I've not seen anyone claim that you are and not being "religious" doesn't actually mean anything. There are people who are clearly religious and claim that their not because they don't go to church or hold a mainline concept of their beliefs. It doesn't demonstrate that you're more capable of reason, more intelligent, or that you are somehow immune from bias. In fact, in the overwhelming majority of your posts, you've demonstrated that you are not capable of logical reasoning, you are proud of willful ignorance, and you perform special pleading regularly to attempt to confirm and reinforce your bias.

So, I'll reiterate, why do you feel that stating that is important or relevant? How is that supposed to have anything to do with this discussion?

[talisman]

Way to jump to name calling, you crossfit faggot.

Winning.

[The King]

Incorrect. Just because you're not aware of what the bible actually teaches and/or encourages, doesn't make the comparison false.

For example, even Jesus said he did not come to bring peace, but a sword. He also condemns the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." Which god clearly agrees with seeing as he murdered 42 children for calling Elisha bald. Or how about when David bought his wife with 200 Philistine foreskins, even though the asking price was only 100? Oh, those christians, with their ""love thy neighbor" or some sh1t".

Someone's been googling the Bible, lol.

Too bad said googling doesn't by default impart actual understanding and reveal to our beloved 'hatter that Elisha and David preceeded Jesus, and hence "Christianity", by 800-1000 years.

[Maddhattter]

Someone's been googling the Bible, lol.

Too bad said googling doesn't by default impart actual understanding and reveal to our beloved 'hatter that Elisha and David preceeded Jesus, and hence "Christianity", by 800-1000 years.

Did I claim that my examples were all NT? I wasn't aware that I had. These were just the things I could think of off the top of my head. Otherwise, I would have added book, verse & chapter.

Should I have noted when I said "he killed" I was referring to god, and not Elisha?

[The King]

Did I claim that my examples were all NT? I wasn't aware that I had. These were just the things I could think of off the top of my head. Otherwise, I would have added book, verse & chapter.

Should I have noted when I said "he killed" I was referring to god, and not Elisha?

What do these "things you could think of off the top of your head" have to do with Christianity, or Islam for that matter, 'hatter?

[Baron Von Crowder]

What do these "things you could think of off the top of your head" have to do with Christianity, or Islam for that matter, 'hatter?

Since when has relevance been important to him in his arguments?

[SS Junk]

Islam is no more "kill anyone who disagrees" than christianity is.

Christians are beheading non-believers now?