This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Islam: Is it inherently Evil?

Jump to new
SirRumpole said:
My apologies to the Japanese. They actually accepted 27 refugees in 2015 and rejected 99% of applications.

https://www.japantoday.com/category...refugees-last-year-rejects-99-of-applications
Click to expand...

Yes, sometimes when a woman is running down the street being chased by an attacker, some people just lock the door turn the lights off and act like they aren't home, others try and help the person, even if it increases their own risk.

I don't know about you, but I know which type I would hope I would be, and I know which type I would prefer society tried to be.
----------

But yes, Japan is probably turning away genuine refugees, and denying them their basic human right, does this make Japan moral?
 
Value Collector said:
Yes, sometimes when a woman is running down the street being chased by an attacker, some people just lock the door turn the lights off and act like they aren't home, others try and help the person, even if it increases their own risk.
Click to expand...

Fine, but when the attacker goes away , the woman goes on her way and doesn't live in your home for the rest of their lives (and their children etc...)

I don't know about you, but I know which type I would hope I would be, and I know which type I would prefer society tried to be.
----------
Click to expand...

There is a limit to how much we can help. You have seen our budgetary position ?

But yes, Japan is probably turning away genuine refugees, and denying them their basic human right, does this make Japan moral?
Click to expand...

No comment on Japan's morality, the point is that we are currently doing a lot more than some who are as well or better off than we are.
 

But we ain't talking about Scotsmen or porridge, we talking Islam
 
SirRumpole said:
Fine, but when the attacker goes away , the woman goes on her way and doesn't live in your home for the rest of their lives (and their children etc...)


.
Click to expand...

You certainly don't send her back to live with the attacker

SirRumpole said:
There is a limit to how much we can help. You have seen our budgetary position ?
.
Click to expand...


Plenty of other areas of waste that can be eliminated before we decide we can't help those in need.

SirRumpole said:
the point is that we are currently doing a lot more than some who are as well or better off than we are.
Click to expand...


yes, I am happy about that, but people here want to stop the help, just because the person in need was born into a certain religion.

wayneL said:
But we ain't talking about Scotsmen or porridge, we talking Islam
Click to expand...

I am not sure of your point wayne, do you not understand the concept of the "No true scotsman fallacy" or are you just saying we have to limit the conversation to strictly "Islam", because in that case you may have to give a definition of Islam, because its not one thing
 
Here is a really good video that explains some of the logical traps I think you guys are falling into that causes you to over estimate the risk we face from terrorism.

It's also good to understand these points from an investment perspective.

 
Value Collector said:
Here is a really good video that explains some of the logical traps I think you guys are falling into that causes you to over estimate the risk we face from terrorism.

It's also good to understand these points from an investment perspective.

Click to expand...

Theory is one thing...Putting it into practice is something else.
 
What is happening in France and other European countries, sooner of later will be happening here in Australia.

If the Muslim community continue to provoke us with violence, there will be an up rising of Australian citizens......We are a tolerant Nation until we are pushed over the edge....We will take so much and then after that look out.

The political revolution has started.

https://www.facebook.com/
For some unknown reason this video has been removed.

It was about Muslin radicals smashing the rear window of a Police vehicle and fire bombing it while the police were still inside.
 
Last edited:
VC

Im saying the no true Scotsman fallacy is not valud here, IMO
 
The No True Scotsman argument is ridiculous.

"No true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge" is simply a matter of opinion and can be dismissed with "Says who".

I really don't see that that has anything to do with the refugee debate.
 
wayneL said:
VC

Im saying the no true Scotsman fallacy is not valud here, IMO
Click to expand...

Of course it is,

If someone says "a Christian wouldn't shoot someone", and then I say "here is a Christian here that shot people", and then the "well that's not a 'True Christian' ", then is is a perfect example of the no true Scotsman fallacy, it's an appeal to purity, a shifting of the goal posts.

The same has been done in the opposite fashion against Muslims here, eg "muslims believe in violence", "not all of the, do", "then they are real Muslims"
 
SirRumpole said:
The No True Scotsman argument is ridiculous.

"No true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge" is simply a matter of opinion and can be dismissed with "Says who".

I really don't see that that has anything to do with the refugee debate.
Click to expand...

If you think the "no true Scotsman fallacy" is about literal Scotsman, porridge or sugar, you have completely missed the point.

The straw man fallacy is also not about real "straw men " either.

It's about a moving of the goal posts and appeals to purity, where people try and change the definition of things to maintain their position.

Eg, saying "well that person isn't a 'real' Christian then", just because the person did something bad,
 
SirRumpole said:
Ok, but I still can't see the relevance to the refugee debate.

It's just another VC diversion imo.
Click to expand...

People said that the guy that killed in Canada can't of been a Christian if here killed.

That's the no true Scotsman fallacy right there,

Eg saying "Christians don't commit terrorist acts" and then when confronted with examples of Christians committing terrorist acts you say "well they arent real Christians", is exactly the type of phony logic used in the example of the Scotsman example of saying"No "true" Scotsman puts sugar in his porridge" when trying to defend your claim that all Scotsman avoid sugar
 
Value Collector said:
The straw man fallacy is also not about real "straw men " either.

It's about a moving of the goal posts and appeals to purity, where people try and change the definition of things to maintain their position.
Click to expand...
Like tagging that kid shooter as a Christian to crank up the Mus. v Christian b.s.
Like I have the King George version in the draw near me at the desk here but I am far from a "Christian". Evidence ....

 
Please everyone if I go out and kill my antagonist tomorrow don't tag me a Christian. Lol James, sorry George you whiting.
 
Wysiwyg said:
Like tagging that kid shooter as a Christian to crank up the Mus. v Christian b.s.
Like I have the King George version in the draw near me at the desk here but I am far from a "Christian". Evidence ....

]
Click to expand...

He described himself as a Christian crusader, if a young Arab man called himself a Muslim crusader before the attack would you be jumping through hoops to separate him from Islam, I don't think so, it's hypocrisy.

On his Facebook page, the self-described Christian Crusader liked and followed many Christian leaders such as Pope John Paul II, William Lane Craig, Edward Feser and others. In addition, he liked the Facebook page of Le Pen, Trump, and other right-wing politicians.

It seems clear Bissonnette was a Christian terrorist. Yet it is unlikely that many in the mainstream media will identify him as such. However, rest assured, had he been a self-identified Muslim Crusader shooting up a Christian church, the media would have been quick to identify him as a Muslim terrorist.
 
Wysiwyg said:
Like tagging that kid shooter as a Christian to crank up the Mus. v Christian b.s.
Like I have the King George version in the draw near me at the desk here but I am far from a "Christian". Evidence ....

View attachment 69996
Click to expand...

While you have that bible, why not flick through to Deuteronomy 17, you will see that it clearly states people that worship other gods should be put to death.

So before you go saying it's impossible for a Christian to get the idea of killing Muslims in their head, why not try reading your bible a bit.
 
You always kick Christianity, which is Western Civilisation.
Have you ever travelled to Europe -- you may learn a few things.

Have you ever travelled to an Islamic Country?
How are your freedoms there?
 

You understand what "new" means as in New Testament ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Iran Is not Iraq
3 4 5
Replies
93
Views
12K
Dona Ferentes
K
  • Poll
FOS - Is it independent or is it controlled by a corrupt Bank?
Replies
0
Views
3K
Keighery
K
Top of this cycle for ASX 200, cash is king?
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
16K
kahuna1
Has the 100 year Jihad (war) begun ... ???
50 51 52
Replies
1K
Views
96K
DB008
D
What is true in investing over the long term?
Replies
4
Views
5K
Dona Ferentes
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...