Buddhists disrupt prayers and fire-bomb Mosque

[Born of Aphrodite]

Xiam

I've said this before, I'll say it again - it is not religion that is the cause of problems, but people.

I mean, hell, most religions have a generally positive outlook, and preach ethical living. Those who are unethical are generally looked upon as not being very good followers of their religion.

So let's go with that. Not very good Buddhists. Of course, this risks the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but I'll hold to this.

Except Islam. where warfare in the name of Allah is following his words perfectly. Sure there has to be a bit of persecution agents muslims first, but as soon as that happens it an all out blood bath.

[Xiam]

Born of Aphrodite

Xiam

I've said this before, I'll say it again - it is not religion that is the cause of problems, but people.

I mean, hell, most religions have a generally positive outlook, and preach ethical living. Those who are unethical are generally looked upon as not being very good followers of their religion.

So let's go with that. Not very good Buddhists. Of course, this risks the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but I'll hold to this.

Except Islam. where warfare in the name of Allah is following his words perfectly. Sure there has to be a bit of persecution agents muslims first, but as soon as that happens it an all out blood bath.

That's humanity for you.

And there will even be Muslims who will say, "No, warfare in the name of Allah is not good." Religion of peace, and all that.

[Born of Aphrodite]

Xiam

Born of Aphrodite

Xiam

I've said this before, I'll say it again - it is not religion that is the cause of problems, but people.

I mean, hell, most religions have a generally positive outlook, and preach ethical living. Those who are unethical are generally looked upon as not being very good followers of their religion.

So let's go with that. Not very good Buddhists. Of course, this risks the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but I'll hold to this.

Except Islam. where warfare in the name of Allah is following his words perfectly. Sure there has to be a bit of persecution agents muslims first, but as soon as that happens it an all out blood bath.

That's humanity for you.

And there will even be Muslims who will say, "No, warfare in the name of Allah is not good." Religion of peace, and all that.

the Qur'an is a vial book, I keep reading it, and all I come aware of is the true nature of pure hate.

[Xiam]

Born of Aphrodite

Xiam

Born of Aphrodite

Xiam

I've said this before, I'll say it again - it is not religion that is the cause of problems, but people.

I mean, hell, most religions have a generally positive outlook, and preach ethical living. Those who are unethical are generally looked upon as not being very good followers of their religion.

So let's go with that. Not very good Buddhists. Of course, this risks the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but I'll hold to this.

Except Islam. where warfare in the name of Allah is following his words perfectly. Sure there has to be a bit of persecution agents muslims first, but as soon as that happens it an all out blood bath.

That's humanity for you.

And there will even be Muslims who will say, "No, warfare in the name of Allah is not good." Religion of peace, and all that.

the Qur'an is a vial book, I keep reading it, and all I come aware of is the true nature of pure hate.

Oh! Ooh! Cite some passages! I'm totally in the mood for some cited passages this morning, I don't know why.

[Born of Aphrodite]

Xiam

Born of Aphrodite

Xiam

Born of Aphrodite

Xiam

I've said this before, I'll say it again - it is not religion that is the cause of problems, but people.

I mean, hell, most religions have a generally positive outlook, and preach ethical living. Those who are unethical are generally looked upon as not being very good followers of their religion.

So let's go with that. Not very good Buddhists. Of course, this risks the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, but I'll hold to this.

Except Islam. where warfare in the name of Allah is following his words perfectly. Sure there has to be a bit of persecution agents muslims first, but as soon as that happens it an all out blood bath.

That's humanity for you.

And there will even be Muslims who will say, "No, warfare in the name of Allah is not good." Religion of peace, and all that.

the Qur'an is a vial book, I keep reading it, and all I come aware of is the true nature of pure hate.

Oh! Ooh! Cite some passages! I'm totally in the mood for some cited passages this morning, I don't know why.

Read the first 50 verses and you'll understand. I'd rather not touch the putrid thing again

[Zombie Lord Moses]

Born of Aphrodite

Xiam

Oh! Ooh! Cite some passages! I'm totally in the mood for some cited passages this morning, I don't know why.

Read the first 50 verses and you'll understand. I'd rather not touch the putrid thing again

Given that I've never read the book and could stand to investigate it at least a little, I'll read the first 50 verses and provide some rich, insightful, well researched commentary on what I think are the more interesting bits.

6. As to those who reject Faith,
It is the same to them
Whether thou warn them
Or do not warn them;
They will not believe.

Thanks for believing in me.

7. God hath set a seal
On their hearts and on their hearing,
And on their eyes is a veil;
Great is the penalty they (incur).

Well that's just uncool.

10. In their hearts is a disease;
And God has increased their disease:
And grievous is the penalty they (incur),
Because they are false (to themselves).

I'm starting to feel like the cards are stacked against us here.

17. Their similitude is that of a man
Who kindled a fire;
When it lighted all around him,
God took away their light
And left them in utter darkness.
So they could not see.

18. Deaf, dumb, and blind,
They will not return (to the path).

My damned metaphorical fire too?

24. But if ye cannot
And of a surety ye cannot—
Then fear the Fire
Whose fuel is Men and Stones,—
Which is prepared for those
Who reject Faith.

First potentially violent verse? This seems to allude more to some sort of hell though.

26.
...
But those who reject Faith say:
"What means God by this similitude?"
By it He causes many to stray,
And many He leads into the right path;
But He causes not to stray,
Except those who forsake (the path),—

So I get the impression he wants you to seek it yourself, given that the efforts of others are for naught. Suppose too that the seal/disease only come after someone's rejection; how do they help amend things? If there's no intention of helping, I wonder what their purpose is.

34. And behold, We said to the angels:
"Bow down to Adam: "and they bowed down:
Not so Iblīs: he refused and was haughty:
He was of those who reject Faith.

Satan-chan?

The rest tells what seems to be a summary of the events in Eden and contains a speech from God to Adam which mentions other famous events described in the Bible; deliverance from slavery in egypt (if I recall right this is a historical inaccuracy, unless it's a separate incident I'm unaware of), parting of the waters, Moses, etcetera.

The sequence feels a bit odd, and there was reference to what might match a modern description of hell. I'm still curious about the sealing situation. It should be enough we've got Iblis after us.

I didn't actually see anything I would describe as decidedly vile outside of hellfire. Maybe in the next 50 verses?

[Born of Aphrodite]

the first 50 (a little less) sets up the sense of hate that permeates the Qur'an. if that's the first thing it says... well that's pretty disgusting.

Qur'an verses of violence is a good website that has the most vial parts boiled down. I suggest reading the context cause it gets even worse.

4:15 is the justification of honor killings. here is an article that really shows that honor killings are an integrated part of Islam.

and a verse right after shows that Allah is not a forgiving god, he just gives you a pass and ignores you if you "repent"

ironically a woman (4:15) found guilty of lewdness is sentenced to death, but two men ******** can have a pass if they "repent" but that only covers two men who experimented, not full on gays.

[Manguusu]

我が名は豪鬼、うぬの誠なる一撃 見せてみよ！

Both parties in this instance are in the wrong. One for building on another religion's holy site and the other for retaliating with violence. They're both d**k moves. Especially since the second party is going against its own teachings to retaliate! I don't know enough about Islam to say anymore about that party at the moment, but I must say the Buddhists aren't being very Buddha-like.

My name is Gouki, and I will show you the true strike.

[Demyan The Devil]

Overnight the mosque had been targeted by a fire bombing, but nobody was hurt.

Why does your topic title indicate that the Buddhists themselves firebombed the mosque? Way to be misleading.

[demonpimp]

kind of a d**k move to build your religions church on another religions holy site.
they knew it meant something to the Buddhist and built there anyway, the Buddhist than burnt down the empty building. would be different if someone got hurt but still mostly the Muslims fault.

[Vizal]

Fermionic

I don't think that religious buildings have any right to be built anywhere, so I am the wrong person to ask.
Their motivation is, to me, however, "wrong".

Even by permit or purchased land?

[Fermionic]

Vizal

Fermionic

I don't think that religious buildings have any right to be built anywhere, so I am the wrong person to ask.
Their motivation is, to me, however, "wrong".

Even by permit or purchased land?

Even then.

[Vizal]

Fermionic

Vizal

Fermionic

I don't think that religious buildings have any right to be built anywhere, so I am the wrong person to ask.
Their motivation is, to me, however, "wrong".

Even by permit or purchased land?

Even then.

So then you're against equal liberties?

[Fermionic]

Vizal

Fermionic

Vizal

Fermionic

I don't think that religious buildings have any right to be built anywhere, so I am the wrong person to ask.
Their motivation is, to me, however, "wrong".

Even by permit or purchased land?

Even then.

So then you're against equal liberties?

I am indeed.