mjmooney Posted July 17, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2012 So,in the koran.Does it actually tell you to kill innocent women and children ? Cause if it does not WTF are all these terrorists doing FFS ?Plenty of self-styled Christians have slaughtered innocent women and children, for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 So,in the koran.Does it actually tell you to kill innocent women and children ? Cause if it does not WTF are all these terrorists doing FFS ?Plenty of self-styled Christians have slaughtered innocent women and children, for that matter. I know that,just look at the crusades.I am just asking if the koran actually says to kill ? cause I get the impression that they are supposed to kill all infidels ?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 17, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2012 So,in the koran.Does it actually tell you to kill innocent women and children ? Cause if it does not WTF are all these terrorists doing FFS ?Plenty of self-styled Christians have slaughtered innocent women and children, for that matter. I know that,just look at the crusades.I am just asking if the koran actually says to kill ? cause I get the impression that they are supposed to kill all infidels ?!This may be the ammunition you are looking for. However, the Koran is as open to interpretation as the Bible and all the other 'holy' books. Read into it what you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 "People no longer see natural disasters as an act of God," said the Rt Rev James Jones. "However, we are now reaping what we have sown. If we live in a profligate way then there are going to be consequences," said the bishop, who has previously been seen as a future Archbishop of Canterbury or York. At least they are not as batshit crazy as the American ones. Well we quite possibly are "reaping what we have sown" for living in a "profligate way" if you belive climate change is man made. The evidence for that is open for debate, there is no evidence for a god however... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 17, 2012 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2012 It is illegal to carry a knife...unless you are Sikh. It is illegal to ride a motorcycle without a helmet...unless you are Sikh. It is illegal to kill an animal without stunning it...unless it is for halal meat. You can't enter certain places with your face covered...unless you are Muslim. I thought the law was supposed to be equal for everyone... It is not illegal to carry a knife unless you are a Sikh Yes its true the Sikhs do have an exemption from wearing crash helmets Fairly sure there is no law preventing you killing an animal without stunning it first There certainly is no law preventing you entering certain places with your face covered unless you are Muslim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.J.Rimmer Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Christans have been slaughtering people for almost 2,000 years... though one struggles to imagine that Christ (if he ever existed) would have approved of such behaviour. Seems contrary to the entire christian ethic. On the other hand, history assures us the prophet Mohamed was a slave trading, murderous, genocidal son of a bitch... so with an example like that how can any muslim possibly know how he's supposed to behave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 20, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 20, 2012 Fatwah for Mister Rimmer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 So,in the koran.Does it actually tell you to kill innocent women and children ? Cause if it does not WTF are all these terrorists doing FFS ? Plenty of self-styled Christians have slaughtered innocent women and children, for that matter. I know that,just look at the crusades.I am just asking if the koran actually says to kill ? cause I get the impression that they are supposed to kill all infidels ?! This may be the ammunition you are looking for. However, the Koran is as open to interpretation as the Bible and all the other 'holy' books. Read into it what you like. Qur'an:9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war." As far as I can see there is only one way to interpret this ?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 So,in the koran.Does it actually tell you to kill innocent women and children ? Cause if it does not WTF are all these terrorists doing FFS ? Plenty of self-styled Christians have slaughtered innocent women and children, for that matter. I know that,just look at the crusades.I am just asking if the koran actually says to kill ? cause I get the impression that they are supposed to kill all infidels ?! This may be the ammunition you are looking for. However, the Koran is as open to interpretation as the Bible and all the other 'holy' books. Read into it what you like. Qur'an:9:5 "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war." As far as I can see there is only one way to interpret this ?! I can't be bothered to check atm, but I'm 100% certain that quote was taken out of context Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 20, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 20, 2012 The Bible (Old and New Testaments) is chock-full of similar loony rhetoric. But the vast majority of Jews and Christians temper it with some common sense and secular social convention. I know plenty of Muslims who do the same with the Koran. Unfortunately it only takes a few literalist idiots to use it as a handbook for mayhem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 The Bible (Old and New Testaments) is chock-full of similar loony rhetoric. But the vast majority of Jews and Christians temper it with some common sense and secular social convention. I know plenty of Muslims who do the same with the Koran. Unfortunately it only takes a few literalist idiots to use it as a handbook for mayhem. If there really is/was a god then he must have been really hard to understand. It is obvious that part of bieng a god is to say things so that followers can take it any way they like. Parlimentorians should take note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 The Bible (Old and New Testaments) is chock-full of similar loony rhetoric. But the vast majority of Jews and Christians temper it with some common sense and secular social convention. I know plenty of Muslims who do the same with the Koran. Unfortunately it only takes a few literalist idiots to use it as a handbook for mayhem. If there really is/was a god then he must have been really hard to understand. It is obvious that part of bieng a god is to say things so that followers can take it any way they like. Ah, but those followers who take it the other way are not true followers you see, only we are God's true children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PussEKatt Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 The Bible (Old and New Testaments) is chock-full of similar loony rhetoric. But the vast majority of Jews and Christians temper it with some common sense and secular social convention. I know plenty of Muslims who do the same with the Koran. Unfortunately it only takes a few literalist idiots to use it as a handbook for mayhem. If there really is/was a god then he must have been really hard to understand. It is obvious that part of bieng a god is to say things so that followers can take it any way they like. Ah, but those followers who take it the other way are not true followers you see, only we are God's true children. If the good book ( any relegion ) is written so that you can take it any way you like then whichever way you take it MUST be right, surely ?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 The Bible (Old and New Testaments) is chock-full of similar loony rhetoric. But the vast majority of Jews and Christians temper it with some common sense and secular social convention. I know plenty of Muslims who do the same with the Koran. Unfortunately it only takes a few literalist idiots to use it as a handbook for mayhem. If there really is/was a god then he must have been really hard to understand. It is obvious that part of bieng a god is to say things so that followers can take it any way they like. Ah, but those followers who take it the other way are not true followers you see, only we are God's true children. If the good book ( any relegion ) is written so that you can take it any way you like then whichever way you take it MUST be right, surely ?! Rubbish, only our way is the right way to read It. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 20, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 20, 2012 The Bible (Old and New Testaments) is chock-full of similar loony rhetoric. But the vast majority of Jews and Christians temper it with some common sense and secular social convention. I know plenty of Muslims who do the same with the Koran. Unfortunately it only takes a few literalist idiots to use it as a handbook for mayhem. If there really is/was a god then he must have been really hard to understand. It is obvious that part of bieng a god is to say things so that followers can take it any way they like. Ah, but those followers who take it the other way are not true followers you see, only we are God's true children. If the good book ( any relegion ) is written so that you can take it any way you like then whichever way you take it MUST be right, surely ?! The Bible Code Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Wow. That just sends shivers down my spine. God is great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 Jerry Newcombe, Evangelical Leader, Says Only Christian Victims Of Colorado Shooting Going To Heaven An evangelical spokesperson for a religious group known as Truth In Action has claimed that the tragedy in Colorado happened because America has lost its fear of hell. In an article published on OneNewsNow, evangelical Jerry Newcombe wrote: I can't help but feel that to some extent, we're reaping what we've been sowing as a society. We said to God, "Get out of the public arena." Lawsuit after lawsuit, often by misguided "civil libertarians," have chased away any fear of God in the land -- at least in the hearts of millions. Newcombe’s is not alone in reacting this way to the shooting in Aurora that claimed 12 deaths and left dozens of injuries. On the day of the shooting Rep. Gohmert of Texas also insisted that the shootings are the result of "ongoing attacks on Judeo-Christian Beliefs": "People say ... where was God in all of this? We've threatened high school graduation participations, if they use God's name, they're going to be jailed ... I mean that kind of stuff. Where was God? What have we done with God? We don't want him around. I kind of like his protective hand being present." Perhaps more disturbing were Newcombe’s comments when on a segment on the American Family Association radio dedicated to understanding the shooting tragedy in Colorado. In taking about the deaths, Newcombe separated the afterlife fate of those who died as Christians and those who did not: If a Christian dies early, if a Christian dies young, it seems tragic, but really it is not tragic because they are going to a wonderful place.. on the other hand, if a person doesn’t know Jesus Christ.. if they knowingly rejected Jesus Christ, then, basically, they are going to a terrible place. Newcombe then turned the tragedy into a time for people to become Christian and avoid the similar fate of hell: For those who are not ‘in Christ’ and see this incredible tragedy, this would be a good time for soul reflection and consider why have you not accepted Jesus Christ.. I would urge anyone who is not in Christ to repent of your sins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 22, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 22, 2012 It's fairly clear that the world would not miss Jerry Newcombe. What a despicable example of humanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leviramsey Posted July 23, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 23, 2012 What I've always loved about the evangelicals who jump on any disaster as a chance to claim that God is punishing America for its secular ways is how the disasters in question almost never occur in, say, Massachusetts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwivillan Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 What does JulieB say about this oogah boogah nonsense? http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/girl-placed-in-care-court-because-parents-beliefs-4969178 An Auckland girl suffering a rare kidney disease has been put into the guardianship of the High Court because her Jehovah's Witness parents will not consent to her receiving a life-saving kidney and liver transplant. The 2-year-old girl, whose name and identifying details are suppressed, has had her kidneys removed and is being kept alive by dialysis. Because of her precarious health, she is at risk of infection and doctors believed she needed to have an urgent kidney and liver transplant or she would die from infection. Jehovah's Witnesses allow transplants but the faith is strict in rejecting the inevitable blood transfusions that would accompany such an operation. They believe blood that leaves the body must be disposed of and not consumed or transfused. The Auckland District Health Board went to the High Court last month and sought urgent orders placing the girl under the care of the court. A team of doctors including renal, blood, liver and gastroenterology specialists care for the girl. Justice Helen Winkelmann, who heard the application, said the team agreed the day before the court hearing that "without a liver and kidney transplant M will most likely die from infection within weeks to a couple of months. "She will most certainly become so unwell within a few weeks that it will not be possible to consider her for a transplant. "Dr K says that at the moment M is relatively well and a transplant is viable." Advertisement The girl was not able to be placed on the organ recipients' waiting list until consent was obtained. Justice Winkelmann's judgment indicated the parents of the girl were in step with the hospital apart from the one issue of blood transfusion. They accepted the girl needed the transplants to live but were unable to consent to the transfusion. Fairfax understood the girl had blood transfusions before, given to her by the hospital under emergency provisions in the Care of Children Act. That provision is unable to be used, as the operation is planned and not an unforeseen emergency. "Dr K says the medical team has worked closely with M's parents to date and she has no doubt that they have acted throughout in M's best interests but the point has come where there is a critical difficulty for the parents, the conflict between their faith, and what the medical needs of their daughter require of them." Dr K, appearing in support of the application, said the girl would not just need a blood transfusion during the operation but also in the lead-up and possibly after the operation. The doctors estimated she had a greater than 50% chance of a transplant being successful and, if successful, she would have a normal life expectancy and quality of life. Justice Winkelmann ruled the girl should be placed under the court's care but both her doctors and her parents would be appointed as agents for the court. The doctors would be in charge of giving consent and treating the girl as they saw fit but her parents would be in charge of all other aspects of their daughter's life. "By making the orders which are sought, this resolves for M's parents what must be an agonising conflict between their firmly held religious beliefs and the pressing needs of M," the judge said. Professor of surgery at Otago University, Dr John McCall, said about a quarter of liver transplants were possible without using blood or blood products but the girl's medical team must have determined they would likely be needed. McCall said he had performed transplants on Jehovah's Witnesses in the past, including surgeries that did not use blood transfusions, but the blood products the patient accepted changed from person to person. Some Jehovah's Witnesses would accept a bypass, where their own blood was taken out and pumped back into them in a "complete circuit" during surgery. But very few would accept a blood bank system where the person gave their own blood for storage in the weeks leading up to the operation for use during their surgery. McCall said he had known cases where Jehovah's Witnesses who accepted blood transfusions had been disowned by their parents and church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts