|
Boner Slaem posted:The real ISIS attacks we have seen have been devastating and well executed. Probably also coming from a relatively small group of people in Europe. ISIS might condone young guys trying to be heros abroad, but I doubt they had anything to do with this actively. e: if I'm informed correctly taking credit for independently planned attacks is in fact a basic part of the strategy to make them seem omnipotent and widespread. And if every time something happens you fall over yourself to go "see, I always told everyone, they're everywhere" then guess what you're furthering that narrative and making yourself part of their strategy. My Lovely Horse fucked around with this message at 10:08 on Jul 19, 2016 |
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
System Metternich posted:What do you mean with "redemption narrative"? Because that's in itself hardly unique to Islam. If you are deranged and want to go out in a nova of violence Islam offers you redemption. It's an old thing, only in Christianity you redeemed yourself by baptism and repenting, not by killing unbelievers. In late antiquity you could lead a lovely life as a Roman emperor and convert on your death bed and still be part of the chosen people with unlimited access to paradise. Nowadays you can lead a lovely life, beat up your wife, take drugs, live the Western life as a petty criminal, then switch over to radical Islam, plow through scores of unbelievers and die a martyr with Unlimited Paradise Access Pass and 72 virgins. Also, you might earn some money for your relatives, thereby making up for being a disappointment when you went abroad and failed to send back money. (which has to be proven yet).
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:05
|
|
|
Yesterday I stubbed my toe on a drawer, then three hours later I got a mail from isisofficial(at)kalifate.iraq saying "we put the drawer there, neener neener, inshallah, gently caress you infidel. Hochachtungsvoll, Mohammed Superterrorist Balkanroute."
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:06
|
|
|
IKEA and ISIS both have four letters and start with an I. COINCIDENCE?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:10
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:I'm genuinely surprised that it took that long for something to happen in Germany. And then it happened with an axe ... a cheap souvenir fantasy axe ... with dragons and tits on it. You can't make that poo poo up. Link to images please.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:13
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Einbauschrank posted:If you are deranged and want to go out in a nova of violence Islam offers you redemption. Um, this sounds like it's a biiit oversimplified. Christianity definitely had times/subgroups that supported the use of violence against nonbelievers for one. Also "Islam" is a super broad umbrella, and it really is nonsensical and pointless to make such sweeping statements towards a group comprising 1.6 billion people organised in hundreds of denominations, theological schools, mystical movements or whatever and living in virtually (literally?) every country on earth. The Islamic theology represented by ISIS-affiliated clergy (which, to be fair, didn't come out of nowhere but can be traced back to older undercurrents of Muslim thought) is only a small part of that, but obviously right now the one that has got the public's attention.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:17
|
|
|
Reminder that one of ISIS' communication goals is also to get people to lump Islam as a whole in with terrorism, because resentments against Muslims means marginalization of Muslims and marginalized people are more open to radicalization and IS recruiting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:24
|
|
|
GaussianCopula posted:Well, looks like refugees can actually be terrorists - who would have thought. That poor kid is as much a victim as the poor Chinese tourists who got axed. Calling a dumb kid with bad decision making skills and bad influences in his life a "terrorist" is an obnoxiously strong way of wording what happened.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:29
|
|
|
Boner Slaem posted:
Well, what do you expect? Not only Bavaria, but I've read somewhere that the foster family father is a Dipl.-Ing (FH), from a working class background(non-bildungsbürgerlich !), who is rumored to have driven a tractor when he was younger !!! Oh the humanities! If only the old intellectual bourgeoisie would have more children. With their genetically superior intellect and their uncanny ability of never having to waste a moments thought on such trivial things as money (that's why they are bourgeoisie, after all), they would for sure convince the rest of the country (aka Bildungsprekariat), that it is wrong to look down upon and otherize people because of their background. Am bildungsbürgerlichen Wesen soll Deutschland genesen!
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
goethe42 posted:Well, what do you expect? Not only Bavaria, but I've read somewhere that the foster family father is a Dipl.-Ing (FH), from a working class background(non-bildungsbürgerlich !), who is rumored to have driven a tractor when he was younger !!! Hm hm hm agreed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
System Metternich posted:Um, this sounds like it's a biiit oversimplified. Christianity definitely had times/subgroups that supported the use of violence against nonbelievers for one. Also "Islam" is a super broad umbrella, and it really is nonsensical and pointless to make such sweeping statements towards a group comprising 1.6 billion people organised in hundreds of denominations, theological schools, mystical movements or whatever and living in virtually (literally?) every country on earth. The Islamic theology represented by ISIS-affiliated clergy (which, to be fair, didn't come out of nowhere but can be traced back to older undercurrents of Muslim thought) is only a small part of that, but obviously right now the one that has got the public's attention. That's why I wrote "switch to radical Islam".
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:40
|
|
|
I can't even tell who is trolling any more? So "real terrorists" need an official flag like a football top from the bayern store? We need more definitions of what makes a "real terrorist".
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:43
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/753940487829086209 https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/753943250306596864 Ban Salafi/Wahabi he says. I agree.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:48
|
|
|
Riso posted:https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/753940487829086209 there's many more "religions" than just those three if you define it like that, en fait everyone has his own religion according to Islam. But Salafis can get hosed, so there's that
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
goethe42 posted:Well, what do you expect? Not only Bavaria, but I've read somewhere that the foster family father is a Dipl.-Ing (FH), from a working class background(non-bildungsbürgerlich !), who is rumored to have driven a tractor when he was younger !!! Netter Schmelzrunter. e: Also, not sure that outright banning wahabism/salafism is the best way to go about it, but absolutely agreed that they are turbofuckers and should be under surveillance by law enforcement. Also, we should think about adjusting our foreign policy towards Saudi Arabia, because they keep financing this poo poo. Babies Getting Rabies fucked around with this message at 10:56 on Jul 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:53
|
|
|
saudi barbaria, I like it
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 10:54
|
|
|
Einbauschrank posted:That's why I wrote "switch to radical Islam". Even "radical Islam" is a oversimplification if you look closely. What would "radical Christianity" be, for example - Catholic monastics, hardcore anti-abortion Evangelicals, Lutheran hippies who get the jeebies when Mary is mentioned anywhere? The same applies to Islam. I get why "radical Islam" is used as a shorthand by the media and in public discourse in non-Muslim countries, but it doesn't explain anything. If you want to understand why that boy did what he did you have to look at his personal biography first, at the social and societal background he is coming from, at the history of fundamentalist and decidedly anti-Western currents in Islam theology and their influence in politics, at the history of Arab struggle for self-determination... there's no easy explanations, and just saying that "people choose to become terrorists because their life sucks and ISIS promises them that by blowing themselves up they get to gently caress virgins in heaven 24/7" is pointless.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 11:03
|
|
|
Ghost Farts posted:Netter Schmelzrunter. Kernschmelze
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Kernschmelze Netter Schmelzrunter. PS: You need to fix your avatar because Goose is an international treasure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 11:09
|
|
|
Libluini posted:That poor kid is as much a victim as the poor Chinese tourists who got axed. Calling this dude a victim is a bit tasteless. He's a brown Tim aus Winnenden minus the firearm.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 11:27
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Calling this dude a victim is a bit tasteless. He's a brown Tim aus Winnenden minus the firearm.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Kernschmelze Raus.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Calling this dude a victim is a bit tasteless. He's a brown Tim aus Winnenden minus the firearm. gun control works you say?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 11:32
|
|
|
System Metternich posted:Even "radical Islam" is a oversimplification if you look closely. If radical is supposed to mean "at the roots" it isn't. Even during Mohammed's life time violence against non-believers was used a mean to spread Islam and the founder himself resorted to violence to further his brain child. So Islam 1.0 has a tradition of religiously legitimized violence against those who stand in its way. I am no Orientalist, but my minor at university was in Byzantine Studies with a focus on the Byzantine-Muslim conflict from the 7th-9th century, including the theological dispute. And I find it annoying when people - even if out of good intentions - try to debate away the different histories of origins between ideologies or deny that different ideologies, as broad as they might have become, are bound to differ. Religions are more than a generic place holder like in CIV5, they have a specific historical background that of course influences our modern interpretation of them. That's why all the whataboutism in the world won't change the fact that violence is one of the founding principles of Islam. And it is not very difficult to tap into this "narrative of violence", as you cannot claim that the use of violence is an "unislamic perversion" or "misinterpretation" of later generations. Does it mean that violence plays a different role in the genesis of Islam compared to e.g. Christianity? Certainly. Does this mean every Muslim is violent? Nope. Does it mean every Christian is peaceful? Nope. Does this violent genesis of Islam make it is easier to draw a comparison between Mohammed fighting the good fight and you plowing through unbelievers in a lorry? Certainly. Einbauschrank fucked around with this message at 11:48 on Jul 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 11:44
|
|
|
az posted:Netter Schmelzrunter. That wasn't even my own, I got that one by posting too much in the EVE Online thread.  I fear when I fix my Avatar, Goose won't be coming back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
The Real Foogla posted:saudi barbaria, I like it Has anyone tried for Saudi Bavaria?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 12:16
|
|
|
Einbauschrank posted:If radical is supposed to mean "at the roots" it isn't. Even during Mohammed's life time violence against non-believers was used a mean to spread Islam and the founder himself resorted to violence to further his brain child. So Islam 1.0 has a tradition of religiously legitimized violence against those who stand in its way. Seeing both Christianity and Islam as defined by their founding history is certainly the right path in understanding a lot of what goes on. But when doing this, you should also be fair and consider the following points: - Mohammed, next to being the prophet, was also a warlord of the early Umma, more than just a religious teacher. Different to Jesus, he was the leader of a young Muslim nation. The Koran knows violence against nonbelievers exclusively during a state of war in which the nonbelievers either have attacked the early Muslim nation or breached the treaties, or base their attacks on Muslims on their belief (aka making war against Muslims as such). No surprise, this is exactly the situation Mohammed and his group of Muslims faced initially. - Christianity similarly faced persecution, but it did not achieve power with Jesus. Only much later did this occur. - Both Christianity and Islam have a deep connection to their founders, but it is qualitatively different. Jesus is considered God's son, striving to be like him is the basis of Christianity. Since Jesus was a pretty chill dude, this works well. Mohammed on the other hand was human. He was influenced by the rituals and customs of the time and region he lived. When not receiving the prophecy, he was not guided by God. To what degree he must be followed differs from sect to sect. While his behavior was violent (as it had to be initially), it is not an ultimate guiding principle and Islamic belief happens between two extremes. Some people try to follow all Hadiths/Customs of Mohammed. The other extreme says "Why should we follow the culture of some desert tribe when Mohammed himself said: 'Remember only the Koran and delete everything else I have said'". Since the Koran is much less violent than for example the old testament, the latter view leads to a very tolerant and modern belief system that should find little opposition in a modern culture - to interpret an attack on civilians as proper Islam requires a much, much larger stretch of interpretation than the opposite, obviously. From the beginning, Islam was used by Islamic rulers to expand their power. This is of course no different to Christianity, but Islam has no phase of underground Kumbaja culture to look back on. Right from the get-go it was a state religion. But the Koran is also specific here: The actions of the early Umma, even the prophet, in this matter (when not related to receiving the word of God), are not to be understood as general guideline. In any case, the majority of practiced Islam is and has been conservative and violent, but it doesn't have to be. Both Koran and history are fact, but future is and should be determined by the exegensis of the Koran and this is determined by the circumstance of history. If the West can develop a voice of Muslims receiving the message of Koran in a non-violent, secular country, independent of conservative influence, then Islam can heal, just as Christianity did. In fact Christianity was used to surpress, wage war and kill people longer than Mohammed's religion even exists! And the new testament was given by a hippy Jew without any political power. We should not expect Islam to reform at the same speed, not if the situation and incentives in which it is used are violent. Islam can and should be the religion of peace, if practiced according to the Koran, by informed and enlightened human beings. Those are not the ones making the rules in official Islam right now... Edit: For that reason it is ESSENTIAL that Germany develops their own Islamic organizations, university departments and studies. Imams in German HAVE TO COME from a German cultural background. It will continue to lead to difficulties if all religious teachings are undertaken by Ditib Imams, even though they are the most qualified. It is FATAL if Islamic congegrations in Germany and Europe are lead by self-educated Salafi Arabs. But this is exactly what is going on right now. I am firmly convinced the necessary Islamic reform can only come from the West. Haramstufe Rot fucked around with this message at 13:19 on Jul 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 13:14
|
|
|
Einbauschrank posted:That's why all the whataboutism in the world won't change the fact that violence is one of the founding principles of Islam. And it is not very difficult to tap into this "narrative of violence", as you cannot claim that the use of violence is an "unislamic perversion" or "misinterpretation" of later generations. Does it mean that violence plays a different role in the genesis of Islam compared to e.g. Christianity? Certainly. Does this mean every Muslim is violent? Nope. Does it mean every Christian is peaceful? Nope. Does this violent genesis of Islam make it is easier to draw a comparison between Mohammed fighting the good fight and you plowing through unbelievers in a lorry? Certainly. I'm not sure what the point is discussing the "original" or "core" beliefs of a religion (which, again, has long splintered into countless denominations or local variants) when looking at any religious fanatics, past or present, blatantly shows their ideological leaders just cherry-pick whatever values suit their needs. I would argue that at its core, Christianity is not about homophobia or the invisible hand of the free market, but those seem to be modern Christian values for a lot of people. Buddhism is a religion founded in part on the very idea of pacifism and non-violence, and yet there were countless brutal feudal lords who claimed to follow its teachings and literal warrior monks that went into battle and killed in the name of Buddha. Even if you could somehow proof that Islam is inherently more violent in its origins and core teachings than, say, Christianity (and of course this would somehow influence all the thousands of splinter groups and secularists and literalists that appeared since the dark ages equally), what exactly is your end goal in pointing it out? Do you think we should let every Muslim we see know that we respect them as human beings but they should really think about how their cultural heritage is actually more harmful than my cultural heritage as a German whose grandfather was a literal nazi and whose country hasn't been divided by petty denominational squabbles and taboos (unspeakable things like a protestant marrying a catholic) for, like, decades?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 13:14
|
|
|
Jippa posted:I can't even tell who is trolling any more? So "real terrorists" need an official flag like a football top from the bayern store? We need more definitions of what makes a "real terrorist". quote:Ausgerechnet der IS selbst hat also die dschihadistische Ideologie zu einem gewissen Grad von der dschihadistischen Praxis entkoppelt. Die Idee, als selbst erklärter IS-Terrorist in Erinnerung zu bleiben, selbst wenn diese Verbindung nur durch einen Telefonanruf oder einen Tweet hergestellt wird, erscheint plötzlich als Alternative für anfällige Menschen, denen ansonsten eher Amoklauf-Szenarien vor Augen schweben dürften.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
So what all y'all are telling me re Germany and the supernatural is kind of explaining why White Wolf is still a big hit over there.System Metternich posted:I had two marxist professors once who were from East Berlin and somehow ended up teaching history in Vienna, and their class was about the failure of the GDR, it was really interesting You wouldn't happen to be able to point me towards anything they'd written/published, would you? The only times recently I can think of anyone Marxist touching on the GDR was in an article about a French marxist dismissing all the failures of communism as people failing to live up to it. It reminded me of our old saw here in the states where conservatism can never fail, people can only fail at conservatism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
Rushputin posted:I'm not sure what the point is discussing the "original" or "core" beliefs of a religion [...] It started with my claim that Islam offers a redemption narrative for people who want to make a dramatic exit from life by killing unbelievers. My point being that a religion whose founder killed nonbelievers is easier to offer you this narrative than one whose founder died on the cross after refusing to be defended by his followers ("He who draws the sword ..."). It is even easier if you do not approach it with a theological background but consider that most terrorists have no intellectual background but adopt a "WYSIWYG" approach when reading the Quran. quote:Even if you could somehow proof that Islam is inherently more violent in its origins and core teachings than, say, Christianity (and of course this would somehow influence all the thousands of splinter groups and secularists and literalists that appeared since the dark ages equally), what exactly is your end goal in pointing it out? Do you think we should let every Muslim we see know that we respect them as human beings but they should really think about how their cultural heritage is actually more harmful than my cultural heritage as a German whose grandfather was a literal nazi and whose country hasn't been divided by petty denominational squabbles and taboos (unspeakable things like a protestant marrying a catholic) for, like, decades? I am no fan of bringing National-Socialism into this, because it is always a bad sign if you need National-Socialism to make another ideology appear less toxic. But to play along: I don't think as many Germans identify with Hitler as Muslims do identify with Mohammed, e.g. So if Mohammed is a problematic historical person, then the uncritical adolation of Mohammed even by many mainstream Muslims is a potential source of problems. It's not like only Jihadists find it tasteless that Mohammed is depicted in cartoons. Even though there is little theological basis for a taboo concerning him. And if you do not accept that Islam has a completely different core structure compared to Christianity, any analysis and even worse any political action that is aimed at Islam and that tries to treat it like a variant of Christianity is bound to fail. Which leads to the excellent post by Boner: Boner Slaem posted:Seeing both Christianity and Islam as defined by their founding history is certainly the right path in understanding a lot of what goes on. But when doing this, you should also be fair and consider the following points: The blend of worldly and spiritual leadership is one of the main problems when trying to reconcile Islam with a modern pluralistic society. And this problem, much like the violence problem, is an essential one that cannot be tackled when people refuse to acknowledge it lies at the very roots of Islam. It doesn't get better by the fact that Mohammed had convenient visions of Gabriel to advise him what to do, so you can't really seperate the warlord from the prophet. Further, some (Muslims) argue that Islam is in a perpetual state of war, as is described by the House of Peace (the Muslim sphere) and the House of Sword (the rest of the world), though this is not based on the Quran. Lastly, it is not evident from the sources that Mekka was attacking Mohammed and his followers, it seems rather as if the battle of Badr was an act of aggression by Mohammed. quote:- Both Christianity and Islam have a deep connection to their founders, but it is qualitatively different. Jesus is considered God's son, striving to be like him is the basis of Christianity. Since Jesus was a pretty chill dude, this works well. The dual nature of Christ and statements from the NT suggest that he's not only God but human, too. Mohammed on the other had is perceived as being much less flawed than your average dude and people going apeshit crazy over him being depicted with a face lends credibility to the notion that he's being considered much more than only human by most Muslims. And he reportedly had no problems with killing civilians. So he probably was a bad Muslim? I don't think this critical perception of Mohammed stands a chance of becoming mainstream. Another important distinction is how the holy books are seen by these two faiths, though this would lead too far. quote:Edit: For that reason it is ESSENTIAL that Germany develops their own Islamic organizations, university departments and studies. Imams in German HAVE TO COME from a German cultural background. It will continue to lead to difficulties if all religious teachings are undertaken by Ditib Imams, even though they are the most qualified. It is FATAL if Islamic congegrations in Germany and Europe are lead by self-educated Salafi Arabs. Yes, I totally agree with your points, including that Islam doesn't have to be conservative and violent, but it has to change if we want this to become mainstream. And this is why I am so annoyed at people treating Islam like a Christian sect. Our laws - including the basic law - concerning religion are based on the unspoken assumption of Christian churches. And as we have an unfortunate partnership between the German state and the Christian churches, which guarantees that the churches are responsible for the training of school teachers and theologians, we run risk of applying this model to Islam - thereby opening the door for Ditib and Saudi sponsored salafists. Another huge problem is that Islam is more and more used as a mean to create a sense of identity. This reactionary identity is based on a defensive attitude that wants to distinct itself from the universal liberal Western values, so it is no big surprise that the religious aspect of this reactionary identity is anti-liberal. It is to my mind an uphill struggle to transform a religion that is a core element of an antimodern identity into a modern religion. So any reform-Islam from the West will in turn create a new wave of Islamic extremists. Einbauschrank fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Jul 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 14:40
|
|
|
Simply Simon posted:Yesterday I stubbed my toe on a drawer, then three hours later I got a mail from isisofficial(at)kalifate.iraq saying "we put the drawer there, neener neener, inshallah, gently caress you infidel. Hochachtungsvoll, Mohammed Superterrorist Balkanroute." Well, thank you for brightening up my morning.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
Duzzy Funlop posted:Well, thank you for brightening up my morning.  Joke so good the heute-show stole it https://www.facebook.com/heuteshow/photos/a.302789020985.156311.264820405985/10153645450505986/?type=3&theater
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
Looks like the 17yo terrorist/refugee had contact with ISIS and send them a video http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/wuerzburg-is-nahe-agentur-veroeffentlicht-angebliches-video-des-zug-attentaeters-a-1103740.html
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
Simply Simon posted:Mohammed Superterrorist Balkanroute If you could buy a new username for another user, I would do this for GaussianCopula or Riso.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
GC do you have an rss feed set to filter all news regarding islams and things that you watch all day.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Einbauschrank posted:
This is different from the Koran. The Koran must be read and received not by tradition but by the individual Muslim. For example I was very surprised how well it works taken from a modernist perspective. Einbauschrank posted:Further, some (Muslims) argue that Islam is in a perpetual state of war, as is described by the House of Peace (the Muslim sphere) and the House of Sword (the rest of the world), though this is not based on the Quran. Lastly, it is not evident from the sources that Mekka was attacking Mohammed and his followers, it seems rather as if the battle of Badr was an act of aggression by Mohammed. As for Mohammed, he follows the Koran, many of the verses deal precisely with the protection of the young Muslim group under the Prophet (which is also why they do not apply anymore). As for who started what, a Muslim would ultimately believe that Mohammed probably followed the Koran in this instance. But he was human so who knows? Einbauschrank posted:The dual nature of Christ and statements from the NT suggest that he's not only God but human, too. Mohammed on the other had is perceived as being much less flawed than your average dude and people going apeshit crazy over him being depicted with a face lends credibility to the notion that he's being considered much more than only human by most Muslims. And he reportedly had no problems with killing civilians. So he probably was a bad Muslim? I don't think this critical perception of Mohammed stands a chance of becoming mainstream. Einbauschrank posted:Yes, I totally agree with your points, including that Islam doesn't have to be conservative and violent, but it has to change if we want this to become mainstream. Einbauschrank posted:And this is why I am so annoyed at people treating Islam like a Christian sect. Our laws - including the basic law - concerning religion are based on the unspoken assumption of Christian churches. And as we have an unfortunate partnership between the German state and the Christian churches, which guarantees that the churches are responsible for the training of school teachers and theologians, we run risk of applying this model to Islam - thereby opening the door for Ditib and Saudi sponsored salafists. What changed this? Reformation, yes. But that lead to wars first and foremost. Politics changed this. Society changed this. We can no expect humans to be different here. Humans are humans. We can and should learn. Islamic churches have to have the same rights and responsibilities as Christian churches in Germany. What we currently lack in secularism, we have to make up eventually. But any Church has to conform to the constitution, because it is our state and society that gives worldly power. Let me reiterate. Islam does not need to adapt. Islam is in the Koran and the Koran is the Islam. It needs to be received by people ACTUALLY from our society with values actually from our society. And I do not believe they are Christian, because I am from this society and I am not Christian, and I have those values ingrained into me. Haramstufe Rot fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Jul 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
I dunno why everyone is ganging up on GC. He presents coherent arguments, doesn't make personal attacks and actually debates with people. I have no idea why he is in a forum full of communists, but it's good that people actually get exposed to other views and have to defend their stupid ideologies in debates.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
Boner Slaem posted:An extremely good post This is a very well-written, thought-out, and informed-post that your average person wouldn't make it five words into because ISLAM = TERRISM has been so firmly ingrained into certain types of people, by sensationalist media and by soulless politicians. And that's a huge shame.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 06:07 |
|
|
waitwhatno posted:I dunno why everyone is ganging up on GC. He presents coherent arguments, doesn't make personal attacks and actually debates with people. I have no idea why he is in a forum full of communists, but it's good that people actually get exposed to other views and have to defend their stupid ideologies in debates. Copy pasting alt right articles and representing news tickers as positions does not a coherent argument make.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 17:18
|
|