Jump to content
Melbourne Football
thisphantomfortress

Waleed Aly - I for one accept our new SJW overlord

Recommended Posts

Tesla    8,062

Anyone that actually thinks Trump would ban Muslims entering the US if he was elected has no right to call themselves a political analyst (or whatever the fuck he calls himself). 

Look at all the extreme left wing cunts that got elected in Europe, had to move their policies way into the centre once in power. Same would happen to Trump. Easy to talk shit while campaigning but the reality of actually governing is different. 

Edited by Tesla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bt50    3,029
Just now, Tesla said:

Anyone that actually thinks Trump would ban Muslims entering the US if he was elected has no right to call themselves a political analyst (or whatever the fuck he calls himself). 

 

Pretty much my thoughts too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,035

This bloke gives a Logie Speech about how just maybe we as a nation can learn to embrace PPL like himself... FFS the bloke was offered a Gig by Monash as a Foreign Relations Academic and he has not even completed a bloody PHD.

Seriously what he did was the equivalent of a coach winning a championship and then in his speech saying... "maybe, just maybe this winning of a championship shows that one day if we dare to dream my team can win a championship."

Then his wife says how proud she is of him being in her words "Really the first Non White Presenter on Australian TV". Obviously she has never watched SBS, or seen Ernie Dingo or Stan Grant FFS.

And just in case you are worried Australian society has also turned its back on her... Monash also gave her an unqualified gig as an academic.

Edited by cadete
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hedaik    2,594

Dont understand the hate for this guy on this forum, I don't think he's the most insightful or thought provoking commentator going around but I dont consider his views to be too outrageous to deserve so much bashing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,062
2 minutes ago, hedaik said:

Dont understand the hate for this guy on this forum, I don't think he's the most insightful or thought provoking commentator going around but I dont consider his views to be too outrageous to deserve so much bashing. 

It's more that he has become the poster boy for leftards and that makes him the target of our hatred for leftards.

At least that's how it is for me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hedaik    2,594
1 minute ago, Tesla said:

It's more that he has become the poster boy for leftards and that makes him the target of our hatred for leftards.

At least that's how it is for me.

I probably agree with you then, the couple of videos of his that have gone 'viral' Ive just thought to myself whatever he was saying is pretty obvious and if you found it an amazing speech then you can't be too switched on. But I do think with his background hes a good voice to have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,035
14 minutes ago, hedaik said:

Dont understand the hate for this guy on this forum, I don't think he's the most insightful or thought provoking commentator going around but I dont consider his views to be too outrageous to deserve so much bashing. 

11 minutes ago, Tesla said:

It's more that he has become the poster boy for leftards and that makes him the target of our hatred for leftards.

At least that's how it is for me.

My main reason for annoyance is that he accepts two mainstream awards that show his popularity with the Australian Public... that shows how Colour Blind the Australian Public are in regards to such things and decides instead of saying that it shows as such he uses the opportunity to say the opposite and accuse the Australian Public as being racist.

The other thing is that the bloke has a fucken dream run, he has none of the qualifications for his  Academic Position, Journalism Awards keeping falling in his lap when there at least ten far better Comment Writers in Australian from the right and the Left. In fact even an painting of him depicted like Christ was an Archibald finalist FFS.

Yet despite of this Pat Cash like 1988 Wimbledon run... he not only thinks he deserves this shit he thinks he probably would have more if he wasn't for a Muslim in this apparently Racist Country as in the one that keeps leaping praise on him like he is Alexander of fucken Macedon.

 

Edited by cadete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deviant    1,490

I've said it many times before. Comedy and politics shouldn't mix!

You're a court jester not a ruler or decision maker.

Expressing views on TV is somehow taken for granted that it's gospel by the public.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deeming    579
3 hours ago, hedaik said:

Dont understand the hate for this guy on this forum, I don't think he's the most insightful or thought provoking commentator going around but I dont consider his views to be too outrageous to deserve so much bashing. 

He's an apologist for radical Islam 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hedaik    2,594
4 hours ago, Deeming said:

He's an apologist for radical Islam 

Id like to see the wording he used. 

I suspect he has explained why youths go the way they have rather than excusing them completely. For example, I can understand why somebody with a shit upbringing might beat their wife but I'm also not an apologist for the Archie Thompson inclined.

Edited by hedaik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deeming    579
2 hours ago, hedaik said:

Id like to see the wording he used. 

I suspect he has explained why youths go the way they have rather than excusing them completely. For example, I can understand why somebody with a shit upbringing might beat their wife but I'm also not an apologist for the Archie Thompson inclined.

Here's some. http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/on_waleed_alys_explanation_of_the_paris_massacre_and_picking_on_pauline_han/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hedaik    2,594
10 minutes ago, Deeming said:

About as reputable as AntiScums source. Would prefer to see the full speech rather than a dog fucker picking out parts that are possibly out of context.

Edited by hedaik
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeartFc    2,493

Nice logic Hedaik, you're presented with evidence and say its out of context. Like the Quran is always taken out of context right? 

Are you suggesting the Herald Sun post the whole speech?  Go look for the whole speech before you call someone a dog fucker coz as far as I'm concerned you don't know shit about the topic. 

Ive seen plenty of what he's had to say and he never puts blame on the religion and its core principles. If you read the Quran and many of the Al Bukhari hadith's (which I have) you'll see ISIS is CLEARLY more islamic then anyone else,  Aly will ever admit that. He spends more time blaming the white west for the problems we see then the cruel and disgusting elements of the Islamic world. The gist of what the moron says is "We have to friends with Muslims or WE'RE the ones (white people) creating more Terrorists attacks".

The guy can't hold a candle to the likes of Sam Harris, the great Christopher Hitchens, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Maajid Nawaz and many many people. There are just regular no name  youtubers who constantly destroy every stupid left wing argument Aly and his idiotic SJW friends make. 

The guy is an embarrassment. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,062
5 minutes ago, HeartFc said:

Nice logic Hedaik, you're presented with evidence and say its out of context. Like the Quran is always taken out of context right? 

Are you suggesting the Herald Sun post the whole speech?  Go look for the whole speech before you call someone a dog fucker coz as far as I'm concerned you don't know shit about the topic. 

Ive seen plenty of what he's had to say and he never puts blame on the religion and its core principles. If you read the Quran and many of the Al Bukhari hadith's (which I have) you'll see ISIS is CLEARLY more islamic then anyone else,  Aly will ever admit that. He spends more time blaming the white west for the problems we see then the cruel and disgusting elements of the Islamic world. The gist of what the moron says is "We have to friends with Muslims or WE'RE the ones (white people) creating more Terrorists attacks".

The guy can't hold a candle to the likes of Sam Harris, the great Christopher Hitchens, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Maajid Nawaz and many many people. There are just regular no name  youtubers who constantly destroy every stupid left wing argument Aly and his idiotic SJW friends make. 

The guy is an embarrassment. 

 

Before you accuse others of not knowing shit about the topic, I'd recommend you at least change your argument from "Islam is evil" to "Wahhabism is evil" so you at least sound like you know something about the topic.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeartFc    2,493
18 minutes ago, Tesla said:

Before you accuse others of not knowing shit about the topic, I'd recommend you at least change your argument from "Islam is evil" to "Wahhabism is evil" so you at least sound like you know something about the topic.

Tesla how many books have you read on the topic? How many podcasts have you listen to? Have you read the Quran, Bible, Hadiths? Do you the differences of the certain muslims sects? Im confident I know more then both of you put together x 10

If you're suggesting only Wahhabism is evil? LOLLL Shia Muslims and Iran are totally awesome aren't they? FGM is great isnt it? The treatment of women in non Wahhabist regions are fantastic? The one thing that makes you lose that argument is that bloke, you know, Mohammad. He is the main man, you can't hide from that, you can't hide what he did and why he did it. You can't hide the fact that he is considered the prefect man and cannot be question by any muslim sect. 

In other words, YES is Islam is evil and I'm prepared to sit here and teach why. It needs reform and its time to stop and face the truth. 

 

(btw that does not mean all or even close to most Muslims are evil coz thats obviously bullshit)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hedaik    2,594
3 hours ago, HeartFc said:

Nice logic Hedaik, you're presented with evidence and say its out of context. Like the Quran is always taken out of context right? 

Are you suggesting the Herald Sun post the whole speech?  Go look for the whole speech before you call someone a dog fucker coz as far as I'm concerned you don't know shit about the topic. 

 

Actually the dog fucker reference was because I saw Chris Kenny written at the end and thought he wrote the article rather than Bolt. 

Either way, if you can't understand why one might have some distrust in believing a right wing commentator as a source on what somebody from the left has written, then you aren't as smart as you claim to be even with your essays and name dropping. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeartFc    2,493
1 hour ago, hedaik said:

Actually the dog fucker reference was because I saw Chris Kenny written at the end and thought he wrote the article rather than Bolt. 

Either way, if you can't understand why one might have some distrust in believing a right wing commentator as a source on what somebody from the left has written, then you aren't as smart as you claim to be even with your essays and name dropping. 

From your point of view fair enough. You don't trust right wing commentators but its not only right wingers who have that view on Aly.

Aly's view's are basically the same as people like the London Major's and Omar Aziz (guy in the podcast below). These guys do everything they can to blame everything but the doctrine of islam. They bring up geo-politic, racism, "islamophobia" (the worst word ever invented) and the west excluding muslim youth. Yes those are factors but it always comes back to the source and the teachings of islam. They simply don't want to acknowledge that. 

If you're interested have a listen to this: https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-best-podcast-ever

 (Sam is a super smart guy and I'm proud to say I'm a massive fan boy)

Even saying  what Tesla did regarding Wahhabism is absolute rubbish and pointless. Islam was very much political, expansive and even more aggressive before wahhabism was farted out. Yes wahhabism is the worst kind is islam in practice today but islamic empires were spreading there filth long before the 18th century.

Im not smart and don't claim to be, I'm just opinionated and happen to know a lot about this particular topic. It started with me questioning my own faith which led to an interest in religion, philosophy and logic. I basically work alone or don't need to communicate with people in the working week so I listen to audio books and podcasts at least 4 hours a day. Ive changed my mind on many things over the years and didnt know much about Islam up until about 2 years ago. I don't get to talk about it to too many people coz its so taboo and people take what I'm saying the wrong way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    702
12 hours ago, HeartFc said:

From your point of view fair enough. You don't trust right wing commentators but its not only right wingers who have that view on Aly.

Aly's view's are basically the same as people like the London Major's and Omar Aziz (guy in the podcast below). These guys do everything they can to blame everything but the doctrine of islam. They bring up geo-politic, racism, "islamophobia" (the worst word ever invented) and the west excluding muslim youth. Yes those are factors but it always comes back to the source and the teachings of islam. They simply don't want to acknowledge that. 

If you're interested have a listen to this: https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-best-podcast-ever

 (Sam is a super smart guy and I'm proud to say I'm a massive fan boy)

Even saying  what Tesla did regarding Wahhabism is absolute rubbish and pointless. Islam was very much political, expansive and even more aggressive before wahhabism was farted out. Yes wahhabism is the worst kind is islam in practice today but islamic empires were spreading there filth long before the 18th century.

Im not smart and don't claim to be, I'm just opinionated and happen to know a lot about this particular topic. It started with me questioning my own faith which led to an interest in religion, philosophy and logic. I basically work alone or don't need to communicate with people in the working week so I listen to audio books and podcasts at least 4 hours a day. Ive changed my mind on many things over the years and didnt know much about Islam up until about 2 years ago. I don't get to talk about it to too many people coz its so taboo and people take what I'm saying the wrong way. 

I wasn't about to comment on any of this but when you mentioned Sam Harris and that you work basically alone I thought that perhaps you should widen your reading material. I won't comment on Islam and the west per se as I have my own very different views on this topic but elsewhere I commented that I am an atheist that does not believe in spirituality, come from a long line of hard core Catholics, and that I am still very much a lefty with a Marxist background from my teenage years.

Can I recommend that you read Karen Armstrong's The Great Transformation and A History of God (I have both books). Karen Armstrong was a former Catholic nun who left the order, got a degree in English Lit and these days she writes almost exclusively about religion (as well as make TV programs) and she does so from a sympathetic point of view with a profound respect for people's spirituality. She as also written about Islam and the Prophet but I can't make any comments since I haven't read these books.

I turned off Sam Harris when he advocated the genocide of Iran in his book The End of Faith (a book I also have). To me he is just another belligerent Yank whose entire world view is shaped by the NRA. Would love to meet him in an out of the way pub just to see how much of a hard nut he is (without guns).

The other topics I would recommend is for you to read the history of the Ancient Roman Republic, the Ancient Roman Empire, the birth of the Byzantium empire, the Christian reformation and Counter reformation, the life and times of the Russian Tsar Ivan IV aka Ivan the Terrible, the life and times of Henry the VIII, the Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli and Machiavelli the Discourses. This would give you greater breadth of context. To summarise what the Prophet did was nothing out of context for his times, prior to Machiavelli politics = religion (this was true of the Aztec, Mayan and Inca empires as well) and that people claiming religious affiliation have done some really evil things yet religion continues to survive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,035
29 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

I wasn't about to comment on any of this but when you mentioned Sam Harris and that you work basically alone I thought that perhaps you should widen your reading material. I won't comment on Islam and the west per se as I have my own very different views on this topic but elsewhere I commented that I am an atheist that does not believe in spirituality, come from a long line of hard core Catholics, and that I am still very much a lefty with a Marxist background from my teenage years.

Can I recommend that you read Karen Armstrong's The Great Transformation and A History of God (I have both books). Karen Armstrong was a former Catholic nun who left the order, got a degree in English Lit and these days she writes almost exclusively about religion (as well as make TV programs) and she does so from a sympathetic point of view with a profound respect for people's spirituality. She as also written about Islam and the Prophet but I can't make any comments since I haven't read these books.

I turned off Sam Harris when he advocated the genocide of Iran in his book The End of Faith (a book I also have). To me he is just another belligerent Yank whose entire world view is shaped by the NRA. Would love to meet him in an out of the way pub just to see how much of a hard nut he is (without guns).

The other topics I would recommend is for you to read the history of the Ancient Roman Republic, the Ancient Roman Empire, the birth of the Byzantium empire, the Christian reformation and Counter reformation, the life and times of the Russian Tsar Ivan IV aka Ivan the Terrible, the life and times of Henry the VIII, the Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli and Machiavelli the Discourses. This would give you greater breadth of context. To summarise what the Prophet did was nothing out of context for his times, prior to Machiavelli politics = religion (this was true of the Aztec, Mayan and Inca empires as well) and that people claiming religious affiliation have done some really evil things yet religion continues to survive.

Look you are right you can find thousands of fucked up shit the Catholic Church and others did throughout history... the organisation was run out of Italy FFS.

But I think Heart Fc has a point which is pretty black and white: The shit written about Jesus Christ did and taught in the New Testament never justified of violence that can be clearly found in parts of the two major sacred texts describing the life of Muhammed.

Of course the reality is that the vast vast majority of Muslims do not take such crap so literally as they good people who obviously dont think violence is justified, only certain idiots take it literally like how only Radical Christians (Basically only in the US) take certain things in the Old Testament so seriously to justify stupid views on how Homosexuals deserved to be shot.

However, the difference remains that the teachings of Jesus and Muhammad in their respective Holy Texts do have some sharp differences when it comes to violence... this is just undeniable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeartFc    2,493

Thanks for the suggestions NewConvert.

We basically have the same upbringing whens it comes to religion, hard core Catholics. However I still battle with my faith and find to hard to except the truth. I hate the word agnostic so I never use it to describe myself. I never went through the Marxist phrase at any point in my life and in fact I despise the far left because I see it as divisive and destructive. The left is obsessed with bringing down Christianity and I fear it being wiped out, I don't care of theological impact rather that  the void it will leave may destroy the cultural west. 

Ive actually read 3 of Armstrong's books, her muhammad biography, battle for god and another one on christianity (forgot the name). I have a lot of issues with her silly political views though. She seems to let Islam off the hook way too much for my liking and doesn't take the possibility of all out world war very seriously. Her comments on sharia, muhammad and general geo-politics shows me she isnt that informed at all.  She chooses the narrative of, all history was violent, all religion was violent, end of story (excuse the pun). If you're a big fan of Karen Armstrong or Reza Aslan for that matter then I'm sorry but you've gotta expand your reading material coz those 2 enter full retard a little too much for my liking. 

This interview from a few months back showed me how dumb and left wing this women is: http://www.nieuwwij.nl/english/karen-armstrong-nothing-islam-violent-christianity/

 

Sam Harris is more of modern religion guy and how it impacts now. Ive read every single one Sam's books and Im sorry but your summary of Sam's position in the end of faith is laughable and you've quite clearly been sucked into the black hole that is "sam harris wants to nuke the middle east" He never advocated the genocide of anyone and he is constantly being misrepresented and character assassinated. He defends himself very well on the topic and maybe you should read more about his views. The fact that you describe a guy who has a PHD in neuroscience and has spent years on buddhist silent retreats as a belligerent Yank shows he you know nothing about him. Further more "views shaped by the NRA" LOLLLL. Mate get a grip. Sure he is pro guns but he hardly writes about the topic. 

Honestly you sound like a Young Turks fan with rubbish like that.

 

If these are the areas you believe Sam has advocated genocide you need to read them, re-read them and re-read them again. 

 

The link between belief and behavior raises the stakes considerably. Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them. This may seem an extraordinary claim, but it merely enunciates an ordinary fact about the world in which we live. Certain beliefs place their adherents beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others. There is, in fact, no talking to some people. If they cannot be captured, and they often cannot, otherwise tolerant people may be justified in killing them in self-defense. This is what the United States attempted in Afghanistan, and it is what we and other Western powers are bound to attempt, at an even greater cost to ourselves and to innocents abroad, elsewhere in the Muslim world. We will continue to spill blood in what is, at bottom, a war of ideas.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. What will we do if an Islamist regime, which grows dewy-eyed at the mere mention of paradise, ever acquires long-range nuclear weaponry? If history is any guide, we will not be sure about where the offending warheads are or what their state of readiness is, and so we will be unable to rely on targeted, conventional weapons to destroy them. In such a situation, the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime—as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day—but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe. How would such an unconscionable act of self-defense be perceived by the rest of the Muslim world? It would likely be seen as the first incursion of a genocidal crusade. The horrible irony here is that seeing could make it so: this very perception could plunge us into a state of hot war with any Muslim state that had the capacity to pose a nuclear threat of its own. All of this is perfectly insane, of course: I have just described a plausible scenario in which much of the world’s population could be annihilated on account of religious ideas that belong on the same shelf with Batman, the philosopher’s stone, and unicorns. That it would be a horrible absurdity for so many of us to die for the sake of myth does not mean, however, that it could not happen. Indeed, given the immunity to all reasonable intrusions that faith enjoys in our discourse, a catastrophe of this sort seems increasingly likely. We must come to terms with the possibility that men who are every bit as zealous to die as the nineteen hijackers may one day get their hands on long-range nuclear weaponry. The Muslim world in particular must anticipate this possibility and find some way to prevent it. Given the steady proliferation of technology, it is safe to say that time is not on our side.

 

Im actually interested in your views on Islam and the west, please link them and ill give them a read. I love discussing the topic and love robust debate even more!

 

On the topic of history in general, since I have Polish background I got obsessed with the battle of vienna, King Sobieski and the Polish empire. That kinda led me to the history of the Roman Empire and the Crusades etc etc. But Id like to explore that more because theres just so much interesting stuff out there. Always been interested in the Byzantium's, Greeks in general and south america but most of what I read is AD since I started with Christianity. Ill definitely check out some of those suggestions coz I've been struggling this month to find anything to read (audio) during work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HeartFc    2,493
14 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

@HeartFc I only skim read that post, have you listened to Mike Duncan's "a history of Rome" podcast?

No haven't got around to it but I've looked it up and seen he's won a few awards for it. 

Free on iTunes so its well and truly on my list!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    702
7 hours ago, cadete said:

Look you are right you can find thousands of fucked up shit the Catholic Church and others did throughout history... the organisation was run out of Italy FFS.

But I think Heart Fc has a point which is pretty black and white: The shit written about Jesus Christ did and taught in the New Testament never justified of violence that can be clearly found in parts of the two major sacred texts describing the life of Muhammed.

Of course the reality is that the vast vast majority of Muslims do not take such crap so literally as they good people who obviously dont think violence is justified, only certain idiots take it literally like how only Radical Christians (Basically only in the US) take certain things in the Old Testament so seriously to justify stupid views on how Homosexuals deserved to be shot.

However, the difference remains that the teachings of Jesus and Muhammad in their respective Holy Texts do have some sharp differences when it comes to violence... this is just undeniable.

You won't get any denials from me.

Just two other things that you touched on: first there really is very little we have of Jesus himself, it is always eyewitnesses account and what they heard Jesus say; the second point is that Jesus was a rabbi where as Mohammed was a merchant who became a general. Now of the first point most of people then would have been semi-literate or even illiterate so it was left to a few to remember and write events down, and then they would have had to survive the ages to get down to us today. Oh, and I forgot to add that it would have been in a language we probably could not fully understand (popular slang of the time may have also crept in) with grammatical rules that were prevalent in the region. With Islamic text it is even harder since it has to be learnt by rote rather than written down - Chinese whispers anyone?

Finally, I have come to the conclusion that American Christianity is a new religion in its own right - one that sprang from European Protestants  but it has now taken a life of its own.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

You won't get any denials from me.

Just two other things that you touched on: first there really is very little we have of Jesus himself, it is always eyewitnesses account and what they heard Jesus say; the second point is that Jesus was a rabbi where as Mohammed was a merchant who became a general. Now of the first point most of people then would have been semi-literate or even illiterate so it was left to a few to remember and write events down, and then they would have had to survive the ages to get down to us today. Oh, and I forgot to add that it would have been in a language we probably could not fully understand (popular slang of the time may have also crept in) with grammatical rules that were prevalent in the region. With Islamic text it is even harder since it has to be learnt by rote rather than written down - Chinese whispers anyone?

Finally, I have come to the conclusion that American Christianity is a new religion in its own right - one that sprang from European Protestants  but it has now taken a life of its own.

I would agree with the last point, particularly post Rowe v Wade. After that case was decided was when the religious right began to develop and enter into politics.

Like many others on here I was raised a Catholic but have a Jewish and an orthodox grandparent. I'd consider myself non-religious, Internet neck beards have ruined the term atheist and agnostic.

I find modern Protestantism just as bad as Islam on an ideological level but it's hard to deny that Islam isn't more violent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,035

One other thing on Crazy American Protestant Nuts... And I agree they are their own Religion these days.

I am amazed at the amount of Australian idiots:

Who because of the lack of presence these days of Protestantism in our country therefore assume these types when they see them on TV are bloody Catholic as its the only Church they have heard about it down here...

It sounds very dumb for someone to make such a mistake but I have encountered it so many times for it not to be a thing.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    702
6 hours ago, HeartFc said:

Thanks for the suggestions NewConvert.

We basically have the same upbringing whens it comes to religion, hard core Catholics. However I still battle with my faith and find to hard to except the truth. I hate the word agnostic so I never use it to describe myself. I never went through the Marxist phrase at any point in my life and in fact I despise the far left because I see it as divisive and destructive. The left is obsessed with bringing down Christianity and I fear it being wiped out, I don't care of theological impact rather that  the void it will leave may destroy the cultural west. 

Ive actually read 3 of Armstrong's books, her muhammad biography, battle for god and another one on christianity (forgot the name). I have a lot of issues with her silly political views though. She seems to let Islam off the hook way too much for my liking and doesn't take the possibility of all out world war very seriously. Her comments on sharia, muhammad and general geo-politics shows me she isnt that informed at all.  She chooses the narrative of, all history was violent, all religion was violent, end of story (excuse the pun). If you're a big fan of Karen Armstrong or Reza Aslan for that matter then I'm sorry but you've gotta expand your reading material coz those 2 enter full retard a little too much for my liking. 

This interview from a few months back showed me how dumb and left wing this women is: http://www.nieuwwij.nl/english/karen-armstrong-nothing-islam-violent-christianity/

 

Sam Harris is more of modern religion guy and how it impacts now. Ive read every single one Sam's books and Im sorry but your summary of Sam's position in the end of faith is laughable and you've quite clearly been sucked into the black hole that is "sam harris wants to nuke the middle east" He never advocated the genocide of anyone and he is constantly being misrepresented and character assassinated. He defends himself very well on the topic and maybe you should read more about his views. The fact that you describe a guy who has a PHD in neuroscience and has spent years on buddhist silent retreats as a belligerent Yank shows he you know nothing about him. Further more "views shaped by the NRA" LOLLLL. Mate get a grip. Sure he is pro guns but he hardly writes about the topic. 

Honestly you sound like a Young Turks fan with rubbish like that.

 

If these are the areas you believe Sam has advocated genocide you need to read them, re-read them and re-read them again. 

 

The link between belief and behavior raises the stakes considerably. Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them. This may seem an extraordinary claim, but it merely enunciates an ordinary fact about the world in which we live. Certain beliefs place their adherents beyond the reach of every peaceful means of persuasion, while inspiring them to commit acts of extraordinary violence against others. There is, in fact, no talking to some people. If they cannot be captured, and they often cannot, otherwise tolerant people may be justified in killing them in self-defense. This is what the United States attempted in Afghanistan, and it is what we and other Western powers are bound to attempt, at an even greater cost to ourselves and to innocents abroad, elsewhere in the Muslim world. We will continue to spill blood in what is, at bottom, a war of ideas.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It should be of particular concern to us that the beliefs of Muslims pose a special problem for nuclear deterrence. There is little possibility of our having a cold war with an Islamist regime armed with long-range nuclear weapons. A cold war requires that the parties be mutually deterred by the threat of death. Notions of martyrdom and jihad run roughshod over the logic that allowed the United States and the Soviet Union to pass half a century perched, more or less stably, on the brink of Armageddon. What will we do if an Islamist regime, which grows dewy-eyed at the mere mention of paradise, ever acquires long-range nuclear weaponry? If history is any guide, we will not be sure about where the offending warheads are or what their state of readiness is, and so we will be unable to rely on targeted, conventional weapons to destroy them. In such a situation, the only thing likely to ensure our survival may be a nuclear first strike of our own. Needless to say, this would be an unthinkable crime—as it would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day—but it may be the only course of action available to us, given what Islamists believe. How would such an unconscionable act of self-defense be perceived by the rest of the Muslim world? It would likely be seen as the first incursion of a genocidal crusade. The horrible irony here is that seeing could make it so: this very perception could plunge us into a state of hot war with any Muslim state that had the capacity to pose a nuclear threat of its own. All of this is perfectly insane, of course: I have just described a plausible scenario in which much of the world’s population could be annihilated on account of religious ideas that belong on the same shelf with Batman, the philosopher’s stone, and unicorns. That it would be a horrible absurdity for so many of us to die for the sake of myth does not mean, however, that it could not happen. Indeed, given the immunity to all reasonable intrusions that faith enjoys in our discourse, a catastrophe of this sort seems increasingly likely. We must come to terms with the possibility that men who are every bit as zealous to die as the nineteen hijackers may one day get their hands on long-range nuclear weaponry. The Muslim world in particular must anticipate this possibility and find some way to prevent it. Given the steady proliferation of technology, it is safe to say that time is not on our side.

 

Im actually interested in your views on Islam and the west, please link them and ill give them a read. I love discussing the topic and love robust debate even more!

 

On the topic of history in general, since I have Polish background I got obsessed with the battle of vienna, King Sobieski and the Polish empire. That kinda led me to the history of the Roman Empire and the Crusades etc etc. But Id like to explore that more because theres just so much interesting stuff out there. Always been interested in the Byzantium's, Greeks in general and south america but most of what I read is AD since I started with Christianity. Ill definitely check out some of those suggestions coz I've been struggling this month to find anything to read (audio) during work. 

that was a long post... I'll start at the beginning I guess.

1. I was always an atheist even some of my earliest memories when I was being taught to pray I could not believe. An innate thing; thankfully I was precocious enough to survive childhood in a Catholic family. These days I divide religion into three spheres: core faith, interface to society and political religion. In the case of someone's innate faith there is nothing I or anyone else could do to break that. It is between believer and deity, and as such I respect it. Interface to society is where religion practitioners create hospitals, schools, etc. In these instances, society has a right to demand certain standards and for these institutions to obey the law. Finally, political religion is where the religious authorities become actively involve in politics as they are entitled to do so, however, in this case they are another lobby group or political party and no special dispensation should be given simply because they are religious. Their argument stands and fall at the ballot box.

2. The left is not obsessed with bringing down Christianity although there are some individuals that would. And there have been many religious figures who aligned themselves on the political left. Former Labour deputy PMs Lionel Bowen and Brian Howe were deeply religious with the latter being a Methodist minister and a member of the Socialist Left. Alternatively if you have the inclination read Peter The Great's biography and he was no different to Stalin when it came to the Russian Orthodox church. In Chile, after independence the Jesuits were expelled and it took another war with Spain to allow them back into the country four decades later. So it will all depend as to the period and policies of the local clergy at the time to get a broader understanding. As I mentioned earlier, lots of atrocities have been done in the name of religion but it still survives.

3. I don't agree that western culture is dependent on Christianity. After all Western culture was around before JC's birth. Secondly, culture reflects the society and these days culture changes every generation or so (approximately about 14 years). Culture depends on a person's ability to to think and imagine. What is more likely to kill western culture is commercial blandness (Coldplay anyone?).

4. The reason why I mentioned Karen Armstrong is because she has a sympathetic view point towards religion - all religions. Sam Harris does not. And as you mentioned you are struggling between faith and reason. You claim that she doesn't take the possibility of a religious world war seriously - neither do I. That is Sam Harris' perspective. I grew up constantly bombarded with the propaganda that it was inevitable that there was going to be a war between the Soviet empire and the West. I did not believe it as a child, as a teenager or as an adult. So many people suckered by fear and propaganda. And yes I have met men who killed out of that fear. Right now, I don't see a religious war happening. Oh, BTW it was President Bush 43rd that declared a crusade against Iraq - how is that working out for us? Perhaps you should leave Sam Harris alone for about a month and then see how much inner conflict you feel. End of Faith is written in the same way that Trotsky, Lenin and Stalin wrote - and history has shown that was a mistake.

5. If you re-read my post you will note that my library contains both Karen Armstrong and Sam Harris, plus Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Umberto Eco. One of my closest friends has post graduate theological degrees the Australian Catholic University and I have another friend that is also quite religious and I attend mass with him (yeah I know - I can't work it out myself either).

6. I am too old to let anyone else tell me what to think. I formed my opinion on Sam Harris as I was reading End of Faith.

7. I can't give you any links to my views because there are none. I have formed them through life experience, history reading and observations.

8. No worries. Enjoy reading those topics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NewConvert    702
14 minutes ago, cadete said:

One other thing on Crazy American Protestant Nuts... And I agree they are their own Religion these days.

I am amazed at the amount of Australian idiots:

Who because of the lack of presence these days of Protestantism in our country therefore assume these types when they see them on TV are bloody Catholic as its the only Church they have heard about it down here...

It sounds very dumb for someone to make such a mistake but I have encountered it so many times for it not to be a thing.

 

the one that gets to me is that when ever a pedo is caught you get the poll asking whether priests should be allowed to marry - irrespective of whether the pedo was a Catholic priest or not.

Another one is that although Protestants are not beholden to the Pope of Rome's authority, the media takes the Pope's word as speaking for all Christians...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jeffplz said:

how does ISIS justify what they do when this exists?tumblr_nt8skzOgT31rd4iddo1_1280.jpg

I understand you are Turkish and there for I am curious; are you a Muslim and if so do you feel that Waleed is a good representative of modern Australian Muslims or just a leftie who happens to be Muslim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jeffplz    671
1 hour ago, thisphantomfortress said:

I understand you are Turkish and there for I am curious; are you a Muslim and if so do you feel that Waleed is a good representative of modern Australian Muslims or just a leftie who happens to be Muslim?

Yep, i'm also Muslim. Waleed is a perfect representation of second generation, non-extremist Aussie Muslims. There are tons of us and we've been struggling to find a figure like him to represent us rather than the cunts channel 7 likes to cover, like those blokes who went to Queensland for a boat trip to Syria or whatever. In fact I met Waleed in the prayer rooms during our home semi-final, so if anything, as City fans we should support a fellow fan :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tesla    8,062

I knew I was going to have to write a lot if I came back in this thread so I put it off, and I see it has moved on a bit but anyway.

It's interesting that people bring up radical Christians in the US. Of course all religions have sects like this. Like the radical Christians in the US, many are tiny minorities that aren't of much consequence to anyone. But imagine if the US government sponsored them, gave them money and resources, spread their beliefs and installed laws based on their beliefs. All of a sudden it's a whole different ball game. And I think that's the difference in Islam, you have this fundamentalist sect of Wahhabism, and it's basically been sponsored and spread by Saudi Arabia. Rather than being an irrelevant tiny minority, it's got a relatively large amount of followers and certainly a lot of resources.

It's interesting to note that this whole concept of Islamic terrorism has only become a big deal in relatively recent times. It basically corresponds with the rise in oil prices and demand, of course Saudi Arabia being the biggest oil producer that certainly affected their power/influence/resources. 

What I'm getting at is, why is there an issue with radical Islam and not radicals from other religions? Because no one empowered them like the Wahhabis have been. Even if you look at Shia Islam, I'm sure they have their radical sects too but it's not really an issue like Wahhabisim has been.

So to answer HeartFc's question, do I think Islam is evil? No. I think it has a sect of fundamentalists that has been sponsored/promoted/empowered by an unimaginable amount of resources over the last few decades, which has resulted in it not being the inconsequential irrelevant tiny minority that it should be, but rather quite an influential and prominent sect. 

What about the rest of Islam? Well of course there has always been issues of Shia vs Sunni even before Wahhabisim became prominent, but I don't think it's significantly different to what has happened between different segments of other religions.

What about the culture/laws/etc in Islamic majority regions? Honestly it's irrelevant. The culture, way of life, social standards, moral standards, etc. of other countries has nothing to do with us, the reason we are having this discussion is due to terrorist attacks in the West, that's the issue that affects us. Throughout different periods of history and in different parts of the world there has been all sorts of cultures, moral standards, ways of life, etc., and just like it's pretty well established that you can't judge things that happened in the past by today's moral standards, I think the same applies when looking at different countries. Not like plenty of fucked up shit wasn't acceptable and normal in the history of Australia, the US, Britain, etc. Society changes, when there was slavery in the US or Germany was killing Jews they thought they were just as 'correct' about everything as we think we are. Just the same, I'm sure people in Iran (since HeartFc mentioned Iran specifically) think they're right and we're wrong. And as much as we are sure in our social and moral standards, I dont think there is an objective 'correct' or 'incorrect', just whatever those who make up a society collectively believe.

As for Iran, I have no issues with Iran. I would probably travel there for lols if I had the time/money. It's funny, Iran is seen as this big bad guy just because of this never ending psudo-cold-war BS that has been going on forever means they're our enemy. In reality, if you had to choose who the big bad guy of the middle east is, well I think it's pretty obvious who I think it is from this post. But because Saudi Arabia are an ally of the West (because for some reason this psudo-cold-war BS trumps even terrorism), Saudi Arabia is okay but Iran isn't? FFS, look at this shit that came out in the news in the last month or so, that the US government knew Saudi Arabian government officials were behind 9/11, and they covered it up. It's like some shit from a crazy conspiracy theory, except it's actually fucking real.

But I'll get sidetracked if I go down that route, the main point I was making is that there is a specific reason why radical Islam is a problem and not radicals from other religions, and the reason has little to do with the religion itself.

Edited by Tesla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
strider    2,381
8 minutes ago, Tesla said:

As for Iran, I have no issues with Iran. I would probably travel there for lols if I had the time/money. It's funny, Iran is seen as this big bad guy just because of this never ending psudo-cold-war BS that has been going on forever means they're our enemy. In reality, if you had to choose who the big bad guy of the middle east is, well I think it's pretty obvious who I think it is from this post. But because Saudia Arabia are an ally of the West (because for some reason this psudo-cold-war BS trumps even terrorism), Saudia Arabia is okay but Iran isn't? FFS, look at this shit that came out in the news in the last month or so, that the US government knew Saudia Arabian government officials were behind 9/11, and they covered it up. It's like some shit from a crazy conspiracy theory, except it's actually fucking real.

Now you're getting into some deep shit there Tes. The conspiracy is very real, very in-your-face and people are just too stupid to see it.

Here's what I mean: 

In the year 2000 there were seven countries without a Rothschild owned Central Bank:

Afghanistan
Iraq
Sudan
Libya
Cuba
North Korea
Iran

The only countries left without a Central Bank owned by the Rothschild Family are:

Cuba
North Korea
Iran

I'll leave it there for you lads to ponder as to who the real terrorists are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, strider said:

Now you're getting into some deep shit there Tes. The conspiracy is very real, very in-your-face and people are just too stupid to see it.

Here's what I mean: 

In the year 2000 there were seven countries without a Rothschild owned Central Bank:

Afghanistan
Iraq
Sudan
Libya
Cuba
North Korea
Iran

The only countries left without a Central Bank owned by the Rothschild Family are:

Cuba
North Korea
Iran

I'll leave it there for you lads to ponder as to who the real terrorists are.

Stay woke sheeple

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
strider    2,381
5 minutes ago, hedaik said:

@stridershouldnt you be solving the MH370 mystery first before moving onto the worlds financial markets?

That was aliens mate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Embee    2,191
5 hours ago, strider said:

Now you're getting into some deep shit there Tes. The conspiracy is very real, very in-your-face and people are just too stupid to see it.

Here's what I mean: 

In the year 2000 there were seven countries without a Rothschild owned Central Bank:

Afghanistan
Iraq
Sudan
Libya
Cuba
North Korea
Iran

The only countries left without a Central Bank owned by the Rothschild Family are:

Cuba
North Korea
Iran

I'll leave it there for you lads to ponder as to who the real terrorists are.

I'd personally like to hear @Fingman's thoughts on this issue

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,035
15 hours ago, NewConvert said:

the one that gets to me is that when ever a pedo is caught you get the poll asking whether priests should be allowed to marry - irrespective of whether the pedo was a Catholic priest or not.

Another one is that although Protestants are not beholden to the Pope of Rome's authority, the media takes the Pope's word as speaking for all Christians...

Then there also the fact that statistically is like some stupid number times safer to leave your child with a Catholic Priest than a Family Member of Family Friend. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cadete    6,035
1 hour ago, thisphantomfortress said:

This won't go down well with his Vegan Fanbase... 

Also I honestly would not be surprised if at this rate that this bloke becomes one of those ALP Celeb Candidates at a Federal Election in a few years time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×