Obama supports Mosque near ground zero...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Stupid.

Is there christian architecture?

---

Seriously? I don't doubt I'm stupid, but most architectural movements in early history were motivated primarily by faith. Jehova's Witnesses haven't ever been a large/powerful enough group to develop an architecture (plus, I expect they'd be too pious to build anything showy), but Catholics, Mormons, and Lutherans are three Christian denominations that all have specific architectures associated with them which spring from the tenets of their faith. Similarly, Byzantine architecture was an expression of Islam during it's equivalent to the Renaissance. The phrase "god is in the details," is attributed to Byzantine architects.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Honestly, this post has only half it's basis on reality. It's correct to say that it is unjust to pin the blame on all muslims for the acts of a few. Each muslim chooses how much the koran should be applied to his life. Therefore as much as muslims are Islamist, they are also human beings in that they have free will to practice atleast in their minds his choice of the truth of the book.

The truth is the koran is the source of Islam. So your implication that the Muslim religion is that of peace is wrong.

You're right, anyone can interpret a religous decree to his liking, just like one can do to the bible. But that is not to say that there is an OBJECTIVE truth of that interpretation, or should i say ABSOLUTE.

When the writers of these religous decrees penned their writings they had an absolute and objective message of what they wanted to say. They didn't write them with the intention of being interpreted in 300 different ways. They had an ORIGINAL INTENT.

The truth is that Mohammed the prophet spread his religion through force, and that Islam has a philosophy intended for earthly dominion. It's methods of expanding it's message are known throughout the muslim world and that's why when Arabs and muslims saw the images of 911, a significant plurality saw it through righteous lens.

Islam is not a religion of peace, it's inception was not peace, it's expansion was done through coercion. And i'm not talking about centuries later after it's original writer passed. I'm saying that Mohammed himself spread Islam through coercion and submission, therefore he did give political Jihad sanction through his own writings and actions.

To say that Islam is a religion of peace is the greatest lie that has existed in this century. Muslims can be peaceful. Their document and religion is not.

---

well put

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar

You make your point well, Ig, but you assume that original intent matters (and that it can be known), when only present intent does. If a majority of Muslims have embraced the message of peace in Islam in the present, how is that different than a majority of Christians embracing a bellicose interpretation during the Inquisition and Crusades? Ultimately people believe what they want to believe and bend their ideological strictures accordingly.

Insofar as I can pretend to understand human nature, when people are angry or frightened, they'll allow themselves to be sucked into a more defensive and antagonistic ideological framework. When they aren't, they're much more charitable and open-minded to "the other."

---

What is interpreted today through expedience doesn't matter. The interpretation changes but the intent doesn't. So long as the document remains the same with the same original intent, and so long as these people hold this document as truth, we will see violence perpetrated under it's authority.

Mohammed was peaceful in the book when he was prospering and then turned violent when he couldn't have it his way.

Islam at it's root is evil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Those events are after the fact of the bible and are political. If a christian bangs a whore and peed on her dead eye socket, would that be a biblical source for interpretation.

I don't see anywhere where the crusades or inqusition are in Jesus's and the epistles writing.

---

And I don't see by what authority you can argue that you know the true intent of the Quaran's writers. Figurative language was MUCH more prominent in the ancient world than it is now -- read some Plato, Homer, Virgil, Vedas, etc, etc, etc, if you need proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar

Seriously? I don't doubt I'm stupid, but most architectural movements in early history were motivated primarily by faith. Jehova's Witnesses haven't ever been a large/powerful enough group to develop an architecture (plus, I expect they'd be too pious to build anything showy), but Catholics, Mormons, and Lutherans are three Christian denominations that all have specific architectures associated with them which spring from the tenets of their faith. Similarly, Byzantine architecture was an expression of Islam during it's equivalent to the Renaissance. The phrase "god is in the details," is attributed to Byzantine architects.

---

lol.

I'm not saying you are. Just that it's a stupid point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar

And I don't see by what authority you can argue that you know the true intent of the Quaran's writers. Figurative language was MUCH more prominent in the ancient world than it is now -- read some Plato, Homer, Virgil, Vedas, etc, etc, etc, if you need proof.

---

I don't have to be. Mohammeds writings and his actions are proof enough, enough proof that the institutional scholars with long traditions and establishment believe in the enslavement of infidels.

Why should i take an adherent's POV who can choose and ignore it's tenets because of our free society, who lives far away from islam's practical implementations as more authoritive than the one who lives it and follows it's traditions?

Those who have chosen to follow that religion and coexist with a humanistic philosophy are living contradictions.

Islam and liberal humanism are opposites.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

lol.

I'm not saying you are. Just that it's a stupid point.

---

As opposed to the wealth of insightful, persuasive posting that's going on up in heah :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

I don't have to be. Mohammeds writings and his actions are proof enough, enough proof that the institutional scholars with long traditions and establishment believe in the enslavement of infidels.

Why should i take an adherent's POV who can choose and ignore it's tenets because of our free society, who lives far away from islam's practical implementations as more authoritive than the one who lives it and follows it's traditions?

Those who have chosen to follow that religion and coexist with a humanistic philosophy are living contradictions.

Islam and liberal humanism are opposites.

---

Institutional scholarship changes over time just as people and cultures at large do. Is casuistry a permissible doctrinal position these days? No? That's funny... it was during the Enlightenment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar

As opposed to the wealth of insightful, persuasive posting that's going on up in heah :lol

---

I wont argue that.

But islamic architecture has appeared in Catholic churches in the New world. Does that mean that they sanction islam?

Heck, fags have Pointed arches in some of their McMansions to give their place a colonial look, does that mean that they accept the tenets of Islam?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar

Institutional scholarship changes over time just as people and cultures at large do. Is casuistry a permissible doctrinal position these days? No? That's funny... it was during the Enlightenment.

---

It's been the same in those institutions for years.

Mohammed's conquest and jihadist writings are well documented. Only liberal muslims who are dragging their way into modernity kicking and screaming think that Mohammed was James Joyce when he wrote those passages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

I wont argue that.

But islamic architecture has appeared in Catholic churches in the New world. Does that mean that they sanction islam?

---

No, just that the Spaniards who traveled to the New World grew up amidst Byzantine architecture appropriated it as their own. At the same time, they didn't put the Alahmbra it on the Peso because they considered it such a flattering representation of their culture. The Saudis, on the other hand, DID put the WTC minaret on the back of their currency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

lol what?

---

Illustrating absurdity.

Too high concept for UTSA.

can't even get lolwut? right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

It's been the same in those institutions for years.

Mohammed's conquest and jihadist writings are well documented. Only liberal muslims who are dragging their way into modernity kicking and screaming think that Mohammed was James Joyce when he wrote those passages.

---

And yet the majority of Muslims are still peaceful people. Curious. But it looks like we've come full circle without getting anywhere, so peace out. Enjoy the weekend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar

No, just that the Spaniards who traveled to the New World grew up amidst Byzantine architecture appropriated it as their own. At the same time, they didn't put the Alahmbra it on the Peso because they considered it such a flattering representation of their culture. The Saudis, on the other hand, DID put the WTC minaret on the back of their currency.

---

ALhambra is a bad ass piece of architecture, i'd do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

ALhambra is a bad ass piece of architecture, i'd do it.

---

They may have done it, to be honest -- I don't really know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar

And yet the majority of Muslims are still peaceful people. Curious. But it looks like we've come full circle without getting anywhere, so peace out. Enjoy the weekend.

---

You can live a comfortable peaceful lifestyle and still condone injustice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

You can live a comfortable peaceful lifestyle and still condone injustice.

---

I know... we do it all the time :lol

I wonder if the plans to build the gay bar next door will happen. After-all, the Muslims are so tolerant, they should appreciate that. Right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I wonder if the plans to build the gay bar next door will happen. After-all, the Muslims are so tolerant, they should appreciate that. Right?

---

Isn't that already there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

Illustrating absurdity.

Too high concept for UTSA.

can't even get lolwut? right.

---

Your sick fantasies of killing whores and then peeing in their dead eye sockets are definitely too "high" a concept for poor little me. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

Your sick fantasies of killing whores and then peeing in their dead eye sockets are definitely too "high" a concept for poor little me. :lol

---

alot of things are, don't be surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

alot of things are, don't be surprised.

---

You mean like realizing "alot" is not a word? Nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

You mean like realizing "alot" is not a word? Nice.

---

I knew you'd run out of ideas and go directly for the spelling smack, Nice.

Repugs and hate media know with certainty how to expose the ignorance and stupidity of USA, how to make a fool of the USA.