The Religion Thread (I hate you guys)

[thetruepandagod]

Radical Muslims that have the power were either installed by us or are our full-on allies, reaping the weapons and perks that come with it. The rest of the Muslim population can only pray and offer continuous decries of violence. That is the real reason why nothing changes. The West and our crazy fucking allies in the UAE do not stand to benefit from any change in doctrine.

I don't even disagree with you fuccboi. I'm fully aware of where many terrorist groups and 'rebels' get their funding and weapons. I know who we are allied with in the middle east and that they are the epitome of devout followers of Wahhabism. I was never even talking about our political leaders benefiting or not. I was talking specifically of what is a large number of people that people like Aks defend even though she would be directly opposed to the enforcement of their beliefs if they were to leave Indonesia in mass and move to where she is, and rightfully so. I'm just sick of the muslim minority myth and just because my video is hosted by a known conservative does not change the accuracy of the pew research data.

[Abandon]

im just laughing that someone got called a fuckboi in this thread. carry on

[Thunder]

Radical Muslims that have the power were either installed by us or are our full-on allies, reaping the weapons and perks that come with it. The rest of the Muslim population can only pray and offer continuous decries of violence. That is the real reason why nothing changes. The West and our crazy fucking allies in the UAE do not stand to benefit from any change in doctrine.

Even something as basic as "uprooting" the drug warlords in Iraq would throw the balance off for extremists in the whole region. We have funded, fed, and armed this united group of terrorists which now have a flag and brand to operate under. This is no accident.

That's a gross oversimplification and generally not correct. A lot of what you're saying is implying that the US+allies are to blame for causing a holy war that's spanned for long before US has even been around.

There's plenty the west and allies would benefit from changes in doctrine. The US, saudi arabia, russia, and whoever else is funding rebels, asaad, isis, kurds, etc would much rather the area be a peaceful democracy because that produces more wealth, even by conservative estimates, than these kinds of wars could in vacuum theory-crafted scenarios.

The reason why some of those actors wouldn't want that is because they're driven by a celestial force. Organizations of private military, govt. military, etc make significantly less money than commercial orgs would in an area that large. The real money is in walmarts and popeyes.

The reason why there's so much military fuckery going on from the USA, russia, and other big nations, is that's the best route for exploitation atm OR the obvious route for dealing with the problem (obvious =/= effective). It should be clear that if there were changes in doctrine there would be less arming of militant groups.

[Ksandra]

Mormonism, Catholicism, and Christianity

FFS

[notorious bum]

im just laughing that someone got called a fuckboi in this thread. carry on

If you don't see Ben Shapiro as the biggest fuckboi, then I don't even know what to tell you.

[thetruepandagod]

If you don't see Ben Shapiro as the biggest fuckboi, then I don't even know what to tell you.

He may be a huge shill for Israel which may make him a fuckboi, it doesn't make him wrong about anything else.

[Salodin]

Confused how Thunder got infracted for that post. Bum too. Truepanda I understand, lol.

[BaneTheBrawler]

I wasn't really punishing infractions, here. I was enforcing time-outs. Everyone got 6 hours break.

[Salodin]

Ohh. Wish the infraction mentions actually mentioned that. Was worried for a second we couldn't respond to crazy comments with out fear of infraction.

[BaneTheBrawler]

Yeah, we can enter messages to the person being infracted but even warnings (which do not have any Points and therefore do not incur a time-out) give the "User was infracted for this post." message, which we can not edit.


As to responding, usual poopdeck rules apply. Keep it civil, attack the argument not the person, etc.

[Roranora]

this page
http://img.bluegartr.com/stop-posting.gif

[Marootsoobutsu]

Psst, they were supporting Nazis against Jews not even a lifetime ago.

While there were some individual (some very, very few individual) Catholics who supported the Nazis, the Catholic Church was one of the primary forces trying to save the Jews, Gypsies, and others. The Catholics, who Hitler *expected* to help him (and who he praised wildly for the help he *expected* them to give, as if they already had), became one of the biggest thorns in his side. The "Catholics helped the Nazis" dialogue has been debunked so thoroughly and so soundly by responsible historic documentation, I'm legitimately surprised every time I find someone who still believes it.

Seriously: the Catholic resistance to the Nazis is one of the proudest moments in the Church's history. They saved thousands upon thousands of Jews, and were working at it long before the British or Americans were. Even the "treaty with the Vatican" was worth less than toilet paper: the Nazis confiscated huge amounts of Catholic lands, banned Catholic youth activities (and funneled them into the Nazi youth programs), forbade Catholic meetings, all because those supposedly helpful Catholics were subverting Nazi agendas.

I'm far from generally being a Catholic apologist, and I definitely have strong theological disagreements with the Catholics, and their historic track record in the 1800s and earlier (and their record in the US with American Indians through the 1930s and earlier), is absolutely atrocious (though also split-- there was a strong-but-silenced barely-minority that objected to Spain/Portugal's colonialism and brutality even in the 1490s; they were over-ridden by the crown, not by Rome). But they did a better job than any secular, Protestant, or generally any other group, as a whole, at resisting Germany from within, providing aid from without. And they did the same thing against Stalin and the USSR. Catholics in the 20th century stepped the hell up when it came to that kind of thing, and they really deserve a TON of credit for it.

[Ezek]

this page
http://img.bluegartr.com/stop-posting.gif

You mean the last two pages. I've never seen Ippo get blown the fuck out so many times in one sitting.

[Roranora]

You mean the last two pages. I've never seen Ippo get blown the fuck out so many times in one sitting.

it must've been some kind of a record for me too

[Andalusian girls]

While there were some individual (some very, very few individual) Catholics who supported the Nazis, the Catholic Church was one of the primary forces trying to save the Jews, Gypsies, and others. The Catholics, who Hitler *expected* to help him (and who he praised wildly for the help he *expected* them to give, as if they already had), became one of the biggest thorns in his side. The "Catholics helped the Nazis" dialogue has been debunked so thoroughly and so soundly by responsible historic documentation, I'm legitimately surprised every time I find someone who still believes it.

Seriously: the Catholic resistance to the Nazis is one of the proudest moments in the Church's history. They saved thousands upon thousands of Jews, and were working at it long before the British or Americans were. Even the "treaty with the Vatican" was worth less than toilet paper: the Nazis confiscated huge amounts of Catholic lands, banned Catholic youth activities (and funneled them into the Nazi youth programs), forbade Catholic meetings, all because those supposedly helpful Catholics were subverting Nazi agendas.

I'm far from generally being a Catholic apologist, and I definitely have strong theological disagreements with the Catholics, and their historic track record in the 1800s and earlier (and their record in the US with American Indians through the 1930s and earlier), is absolutely atrocious (though also split-- there was a strong-but-silenced barely-minority that objected to Spain/Portugal's colonialism and brutality even in the 1490s; they were over-ridden by the crown, not by Rome). But they did a better job than any secular, Protestant, or generally any other group, as a whole, at resisting Germany from within, providing aid from without. And they did the same thing against Stalin and the USSR. Catholics in the 20th century stepped the hell up when it came to that kind of thing, and they really deserve a TON of credit for it.

that's a pretty apologetic view of Catholic cooperation with Nazi Germany. while the Catholic Church did constitute the most serious domestic opposition to Nazi political goals (besides maybe the Junker military class that would eventually try to kill Hitler), primarily when opposing the euthanasia/sterilization programs, as you alluded to the Papal State was the very first sovereign polity to sign a diplomatic compact with The Third Reich, and this granted the latter a degree of international legitimacy and prestige not enjoyed by other radical states (see, USSR). what Catholic opposition there was was primarily limited to the activity of very brave individual souls, but the general tenor of the Church was one of acquiescence, and millions of German Catholics found little difficulty in reconciling their faith with the demands of the Party and were enthusiastic participants in the regime.

you're correct that the Nazis began moving against Catholic organizations as they wanted to subsume the entirety of civil society into their totalitarian apparatus, and thus saw an internecine celestial empire with demands of moral and behavioral subservience as an unacceptable rival. given time the Nazi ideal was clearly to stamp out Catholicism, and very likely Protestantism as well, and have the Party assume the societal and psychological roles traditionally provided by religion and Hitler himself the role traditionally preserved for God.

as an addendum, the relationship between Nazi and Vatican aside it is incontrovertible the Catholic Church wholeheartedly supported the fascist regimes in Spain and Italy. if Hitler had not moved against the Church i suspect they would have supported him as earnestly as they supported Franco and Mussolini. the Vatican had few if any moral qualms with totalitarian fascism as a doctrine of governance.

[Fondue]

[Kyreth]

I can see one angle of serious piss-offedness being legit here.

ISIS is 0.1% of the Muslim population (let's just use that, even if it isn't perfectly accurate.). More moderate Islam says these people aren't Muslims or worse.

How is it that 99.9% of Islam can't stomp out a pack of mad dogs with help from the rest of the world? Why do they control a not inconsiderable swathe of the Middle East?

The only way that happens is if a larger portion of the population either won't act or acts with the tip of the ISIS iceberg. And that stains the reputation of every Muslim on the planet, good or bad. Guilt by association is a real thing, and the more it happens, the more people are going to look at that refugee or the guy living alone down the way and think he's got a gun in the house, a bomb in the basement, and they're only safe if they get some good old-fashioned pogroms going on anyone with a funny Middle-Eastern name.

That's the crisis for the Islamic faith right now. It doesn't take a majority, even a small minority that's active enough will do for the rest in the eyes of outsiders.

[Zeb]

[Waraji]

How is it that 99.9% of Islam can't stomp out a pack of mad dogs with help from the rest of the world? Why do they control a not inconsiderable swathe of the Middle East?

I personally believe, that they 1) just don't care, and/or 2) deep down in the area of the brain where they hold their deeply held religious beliefs (the Quran) they agree with what these radicals are doing and what they stand for, as we've seen with these polls claiming such a large percentage agree with applying Sharia law everywhere and what have you. Been mentioned here time and time again how not all Muslims are Radicals, and how small the percentage of Radicals really is. But that does not give peaceful Muslims a safe face about not Physically doing jack shit about it.

My hat to Kurdish fighters. Fuck Saudi Arabia for not doing shit about the people who represent the vast majority of their population (Muslims). Fuck Turkey for allowing the gruesome shit going on with secular and non-muslim rights activists.

Like the lady said in Zeb's video from '14 "the peaceful majority are irrelevant", and in my opinion, they are part of the problem.

[Marootsoobutsu]

I personally believe, that they 1) just don't care, and/or 2) deep down in the area of the brain where they hold their deeply held religious beliefs (the Quran) they agree with what these radicals are doing and what they stand for, as we've seen with these polls claiming such a large percentage agree with applying Sharia law everywhere and what have you. Been mentioned here time and time again how not all Muslims are Radicals, and how small the percentage of Radicals really is. But that does not give peaceful Muslims a safe face about not Physically doing jack shit about it.

My hat to Kurdish fighters. Fuck Saudi Arabia for not doing shit about the people who represent the vast majority of their population (Muslims). Fuck Turkey for allowing the gruesome shit going on with secular and non-muslim rights activists.

Like the lady said in Zeb's video from '14 "the peaceful majority are irrelevant", and in my opinion, they are part of the problem.

It needs to be said again: the "radicals" aren't radical. American, "moderate" Muslims are far more extreme in their deviation from the standard than ISIS is. The Saudi's? They're the international moderate wing of Islam. Turkey's leftist. Really let that sink in: many folks may be running from ISIS, but there's a distinction between fearing for their lives, and thinking ISIS is necessarily behaving in an anti-Islamic fashion. MANY who are running are fine with the same tactics used against basically anyone else and may not see it as a religious problem, but as a political or economic problem.