TotalF1 Jens

Prophet Muhammad Controversy

239 posts in this topic

I agree with Ash here... Athiests, inspite of what they might say or argue are deeply afraid of where they are going when they die.

I think I've already replied to this argument: it is not us who should be afraid it is you who do not worship the Very Holy Murray Walker Monster (whose Hell is infinitely worse than your God's). In case it was too subtle I'm suggesting the chances of your religion being correct are extremely low - you'd best hope the muslims aren't correct, for instance.

On the otherhand, my ethical beliefs are probably very similar to a liberal Christian's. In fact I suspect He might reward me for doing what I think is right (according to the conscience He gave me after all) over a Christian who does the same out of fear of Hell. Furthermore Christianity seems like a very cosy belief system whereby you don't have to actually live like Christ, only repent for one's selfishness in letting Africans starve, say.

Finally, this argument takes away any morality Christians might have - it amounts to doing something that goes against one's conscience purely for self-interest (avoiding Hell).

Now that sort of rubbish really gets up my nose! People who make daft statements and then run away when the argument (or lack of) is challenged or questioned in any way. Ostrich syndrome at it's most spectacular! <_<

I have no intention of attempting to change anybody's beliefs, and I wouldn't dream of attacking anybody's beliefs, so why should I have to put up with it from others?? :angry:

Indeed. However, Brother Monza, pray turn the other cheek. They know not what they do. After all they are only doing what they are told to do (convert us all) by a higher authority than we can ever understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

indeed. Im Sh#t scared of death Wez as i dunno what will happen? However i dont understand how you could just die and thats it? however science may say we die and thats it, but considering i do believe in ghosts and i know a few people who claim to have seen a white light with a figure standing at the end when they were very close to death/dead but brought back to life. TBH i dont believe in god and all that crap but i do believe in an afterlife?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ive said all I need to say... I not gonna waste my time with this lot.

Howzit Wez, it's great to know that your'e a Christian and I know that our arguments are not in vain. I am doing a little research on all the gaps/flaws/missing links in evolution and I will present them by next week.

So watch this space ...

Cheers

Ash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I've already replied to this argument: it is not us who should be afraid it is you who do not worship the Very Holy Murray Walker Monster (whose Hell is infinitely worse than your God's). In case it was too subtle I'm suggesting the chances of your religion being correct are extremely low - you'd best hope the muslims aren't correct, for instance.

On the otherhand, my ethical beliefs are probably very similar to a liberal Christian's. In fact I suspect He might reward me for doing what I think is right (according to the conscience He gave me after all) over a Christian who does the same out of fear of Hell. Furthermore Christianity seems like a very cosy belief system whereby you don't have to actually live like Christ, only repent for one's selfishness in letting Africans starve, say.

Finally, this argument takes away any morality Christians might have - it amounts to doing something that goes against one's conscience purely for self-interest (avoiding Hell).

Indeed. However, Brother Monza, pray turn the other cheek. They know not what they do. After all they are only doing what they are told to do (convert us all) by a higher authority than we can ever understand.

Murray, you are misinformed and are thicker than two bricks. Unfortunately, there are not that many good ambassadors of the Christian faith, and fair, you base your arguments on that. Who knows the date of their death (except for those who premeditatedly kill themselves)? If you die today, you will know all about it.

Russian roulette is a safer option than picking on Christ Jesus and his followers. I'm dead serious.

Sounds like a threat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Howzit Wez, it's great to know that your'e a Christian and I know that our arguments are not in vain. I am doing a little research on all the gaps/flaws/missing links in evolution and I will present them by next week.

So watch this space ...

Cheers

Ash

I'm really looking forward to this, Ash, and to posting my reply. Should be an interesting debate. You are a sensible chap, so I'm expecting much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yes invite a muslim to the forum, we could do with some more diversity

Good.. I accept the invitation, though I came to this website looking for the new McLaren F1 Wallpapers.

Firstly a bit of a background, I am working in Karachi, Pakistan and yes I am a muslim.

I have had this debate with non-muslims before, and the problem is that it is very very difficult to convey the way these images hurt us. Islam does not allow pictures of the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet is very integral to our lives, because we believe he led the "perfect life" and aspire to emulate his principles/morals etc.. to our fullest extent.

Making fun/joking about someone we respect so absolutely is bound to create rage amongst the muslim community and that is exactly what has happened.

People will argue that they were exercising their "Freedom" of speech and that this is such a sacred western ideal that it has to be upheld.

But this is an unfair argument, because they make "Freedom" of speech into an ideal in itself and forget why we have Freedom of Speech in the first place. The purpose of Freedom of Speech is to encourage dialougue and identify ills in society. Speech is "free" to the point it promotes upholding of people's rights, identification of wrongs etc.. Freedom of speech was not constituted to allow people to mock religion, etc...

Islam is an extremely peace loving religion which has been given a bad reputation by a minority of militants. The Holy Prophet was known for his level of compassion, to the point that when Madina (Where the muslims were protecting themselves from attack from the Makkans) was under attack, the Holy Prophet forbade muslims from chopping down trees (because in the desert trees are a precious commodity) and harming the enemies' women, children and elderly. Muslims were only allowed to harm people waging war. (Which, if you notice, is not what Osama Bin Laden did in 9/11).

The point is the cartoons weren't prooving anything, on the contrary they were inciting the muslims unncessarily and hence were not actually exercising the "Freedom" of speech the way "Freedom" of speech is meant to be.

And this is not just a personal point of view, as you can see in this link http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/20...l.ap/index.html

A British Historian has been jailed for exercising his freedom of speech, just because what he said wasn't exactly "Freedom" of speech.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm really looking forward to this, Ash, and to posting my reply. Should be an interesting debate. You are a sensible chap, so I'm expecting much.

Thanks, Monza. You will not be disappointed.

Cheers ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good.. I accept the invitation, though I came to this website looking for the new McLaren F1 Wallpapers.

Firstly a bit of a background, I am working in Karachi, Pakistan and yes I am a muslim.

I have had this debate with non-muslims before, and the problem is that it is very very difficult to convey the way these images hurt us. Islam does not allow pictures of the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet is very integral to our lives, because we believe he led the "perfect life" and aspire to emulate his principles/morals etc.. to our fullest extent.

Making fun/joking about someone we respect so absolutely is bound to create rage amongst the muslim community and that is exactly what has happened.

People will argue that they were exercising their "Freedom" of speech and that this is such a sacred western ideal that it has to be upheld.

But this is an unfair argument, because they make "Freedom" of speech into an ideal in itself and forget why we have Freedom of Speech in the first place. The purpose of Freedom of Speech is to encourage dialougue and identify ills in society. Speech is "free" to the point it promotes upholding of people's rights, identification of wrongs etc.. Freedom of speech was not constituted to allow people to mock religion, etc...

Islam is an extremely peace loving religion which has been given a bad reputation by a minority of militants. The Holy Prophet was known for his level of compassion, to the point that when Madina (Where the muslims were protecting themselves from attack from the Makkans) was under attack, the Holy Prophet forbade muslims from chopping down trees (because in the desert trees are a precious commodity) and harming the enemies' women, children and elderly. Muslims were only allowed to harm people waging war. (Which, if you notice, is not what Osama Bin Laden did in 9/11).

The point is the cartoons weren't prooving anything, on the contrary they were inciting the muslims unncessarily and hence were not actually exercising the "Freedom" of speech the way "Freedom" of speech is meant to be.

And this is not just a personal point of view, as you can see in this link http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/20...l.ap/index.html

A British Historian has been jailed for exercising his freedom of speech, just because what he said wasn't exactly "Freedom" of speech.

Welcome to the forum basaam. I hope you stick around and contribute to the other threads. We're not such a bad lot. I also found it interesting that David Irving was jailed for denying the holocaust. It suggests double standards in that it is perfectly acceptable to insult the Islamic community but not the Jewish community. I do not understand why it is forbidden to portray the prophet, though. Perhaps you could explain? Is it the same as idolatry? I do understand the cartoon, though, and it's original intent. Such satire is a strong tradition and does convey a message, however offensive some may find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good.. I accept the invitation, though I came to this website looking for the new McLaren F1 Wallpapers.

Firstly a bit of a background, I am working in Karachi, Pakistan and yes I am a muslim.

.

:welcome: bassaam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good.. I accept the invitation, though I came to this website looking for the new McLaren F1 Wallpapers.

Firstly a bit of a background, I am working in Karachi, Pakistan and yes I am a muslim.

I have had this debate with non-muslims before, and the problem is that it is very very difficult to convey the way these images hurt us. Islam does not allow pictures of the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet is very integral to our lives, because we believe he led the "perfect life" and aspire to emulate his principles/morals etc.. to our fullest extent.

Making fun/joking about someone we respect so absolutely is bound to create rage amongst the muslim community and that is exactly what has happened.

People will argue that they were exercising their "Freedom" of speech and that this is such a sacred western ideal that it has to be upheld.

But this is an unfair argument, because they make "Freedom" of speech into an ideal in itself and forget why we have Freedom of Speech in the first place. The purpose of Freedom of Speech is to encourage dialougue and identify ills in society. Speech is "free" to the point it promotes upholding of people's rights, identification of wrongs etc.. Freedom of speech was not constituted to allow people to mock religion, etc...

Islam is an extremely peace loving religion which has been given a bad reputation by a minority of militants. The Holy Prophet was known for his level of compassion, to the point that when Madina (Where the muslims were protecting themselves from attack from the Makkans) was under attack, the Holy Prophet forbade muslims from chopping down trees (because in the desert trees are a precious commodity) and harming the enemies' women, children and elderly. Muslims were only allowed to harm people waging war. (Which, if you notice, is not what Osama Bin Laden did in 9/11).

The point is the cartoons weren't prooving anything, on the contrary they were inciting the muslims unncessarily and hence were not actually exercising the "Freedom" of speech the way "Freedom" of speech is meant to be.

And this is not just a personal point of view, as you can see in this link http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/20...l.ap/index.html

A British Historian has been jailed for exercising his freedom of speech, just because what he said wasn't exactly "Freedom" of speech.

They were excercising freedom of the press in addition to freedom of speech. You state that freedom of speech isn't constituted to mocking religions, but what about the anti-Christian and anti-Semitic cartoons frequently found in Arabic textbooks and newspapers? Do you see any Christians or Jews burning down embassies or calling for people to be executed? I don't think so.

Freedom of speech allows us to state what we would like. Some radical groups dislike freedom, and I hope to get this book someday:http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/031232700...glance&n=283155

On Saturday I had a conversation with a muslim high school student from a different school. It was because I had gotten 3 bonus questions right about Islam. I told him about the book, and how many believe the faith has been hijacked by a radical sect. He agreed and we wished each other the best of luck.

The muslims that were incited don't understand one thing. They were cartoons. CARTOONS. There have been so many against other religions that they haven't burned down embassies. The violence has gone out of control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Murray, you are misinformed and are thicker than two bricks. Unfortunately, there are not that many good ambassadors of the Christian faith, and fair, you base your arguments on that. Who knows the date of their death (except for those who premeditatedly kill themselves)? If you die today, you will know all about it.

Russian roulette is a safer option than picking on Christ Jesus and his followers. I'm dead serious.

Sounds like a threat?

It seems you have no arguments apart from threats and extremely dodgy science. It is no good merely repeating the same threat that I have already countered. In any case why is it necessary for me to worship God? Is He really that vain? Furthermore why can He not forgive me if I don't? He seems a very flawed character.

Good.. I accept the invitation, though I came to this website looking for the new McLaren F1 Wallpapers.

Firstly a bit of a background, I am working in Karachi, Pakistan and yes I am a muslim.

I have had this debate with non-muslims before, and the problem is that it is very very difficult to convey the way these images hurt us. Islam does not allow pictures of the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet is very integral to our lives, because we believe he led the "perfect life" and aspire to emulate his principles/morals etc.. to our fullest extent.

Making fun/joking about someone we respect so absolutely is bound to create rage amongst the muslim community and that is exactly what has happened.

People will argue that they were exercising their "Freedom" of speech and that this is such a sacred western ideal that it has to be upheld.

But this is an unfair argument, because they make "Freedom" of speech into an ideal in itself and forget why we have Freedom of Speech in the first place. The purpose of Freedom of Speech is to encourage dialougue and identify ills in society. Speech is "free" to the point it promotes upholding of people's rights, identification of wrongs etc.. Freedom of speech was not constituted to allow people to mock religion, etc...

Islam is an extremely peace loving religion which has been given a bad reputation by a minority of militants. The Holy Prophet was known for his level of compassion, to the point that when Madina (Where the muslims were protecting themselves from attack from the Makkans) was under attack, the Holy Prophet forbade muslims from chopping down trees (because in the desert trees are a precious commodity) and harming the enemies' women, children and elderly. Muslims were only allowed to harm people waging war. (Which, if you notice, is not what Osama Bin Laden did in 9/11).

The point is the cartoons weren't prooving anything, on the contrary they were inciting the muslims unncessarily and hence were not actually exercising the "Freedom" of speech the way "Freedom" of speech is meant to be.

And this is not just a personal point of view, as you can see in this link http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/20...l.ap/index.html

A British Historian has been jailed for exercising his freedom of speech, just because what he said wasn't exactly "Freedom" of speech.

Welcome bassaam. Great to have a new perspective on this. I disagree with you though. The majority of people in the West are not Islamic and so the view of free speach we have may be different to yours. Irving's jail sentence is a joke - the Austrians (and Germans) just can't get over their guilt from WW2.

Good points too AR5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with Ash here... Athiests, inspite of what they might say or argue are deeply afraid of where they are going when they die. Evolution is rubbish by the way, all you athiest just use it to help you sleep easy at night.

I see that your Christian ideals do not prevent sweeping stereotypes.....

What utter nonsense!!! I am an atheist and am completely comfortable with the knowledge that death is the natural and inevitable consequence of life. In fact, it is the certainty of my own mortality which spurs me to leave a legacy that my children and family can respect, in the hope that I will have made some impact (however small) during my time on this big old dirt ball. In the end, my hope is that 'I' mattered, even if only in some small way.

As Russ (I think) said, it is generally the theists who fear death, and this spurs an adherence to a baseless belief in an "afterlife", which is designed to offer the hope of solace after death. In this way, it eases the passing, not only of oneself, but also of one's loved ones. Anthropologists can trace similar myths and superstitions throughout almost every recorded human society, which only shows that it is a primitive and instinctual fear that our species has yet to come to terms with.

Howzit Wez, it's great to know that your'e a Christian and I know that our arguments are not in vain. I am doing a little research on all the gaps/flaws/missing links in evolution and I will present them by next week.

Ash, once again, I don't know how to make it any clearer to you. A gap in a theory does not disprove it. It only demonstrates that the theory is not yet complete.

However, perhaps this is a better question for you. Why is it that the theory of evolution has been met with almost universal acceptance throughout the world's scientific community, while at the same time a belief in some form of "God" is almost equally universal? Evolution is not, and never was, intended to replace religious belief, only to provide a scientific explanation for the development of life on Earth. It is a means of explaning the mechanisms by which life operates though scientific examination and observation.

A belief in the underlying truth of Genesis is as legitimate a basis for religious belief as any other. But any attempt to promote it as an alternative to evolution is doomed, as it simply cannot withstand the rigors of scientific scrutiny (and it was never intended to).

Murray, you are misinformed and are thicker than two bricks. Unfortunately, there are not that many good ambassadors of the Christian faith, and fair, you base your arguments on that. Who knows the date of their death (except for those who premeditatedly kill themselves)? If you die today, you will know all about it.

Russian roulette is a safer option than picking on Christ Jesus and his followers. I'm dead serious.

Sounds like a threat?

Here come the insults, ad hominems, and threats....... right on schedule.

Ash, is this a demonstration of your own qualifications to serve as an ambassador of your faith? Is this an example of the type of fire and brimstone techniques that have so far won you converts?? Is it your intent to inspire others to share in your faith, or bully and cajole them?

It seems to me a poor substitute for reason and civilized debate.

Good.. I accept the invitation, though I came to this website looking for the new McLaren F1 Wallpapers.

Firstly a bit of a background, I am working in Karachi, Pakistan and yes I am a muslim.

I have had this debate with non-muslims before, and the problem is that it is very very difficult to convey the way these images hurt us. Islam does not allow pictures of the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet is very integral to our lives, because we believe he led the "perfect life" and aspire to emulate his principles/morals etc.. to our fullest extent.

Making fun/joking about someone we respect so absolutely is bound to create rage amongst the muslim community and that is exactly what has happened.

People will argue that they were exercising their "Freedom" of speech and that this is such a sacred western ideal that it has to be upheld.

But this is an unfair argument, because they make "Freedom" of speech into an ideal in itself and forget why we have Freedom of Speech in the first place. The purpose of Freedom of Speech is to encourage dialougue and identify ills in society. Speech is "free" to the point it promotes upholding of people's rights, identification of wrongs etc.. Freedom of speech was not constituted to allow people to mock religion, etc...

Islam is an extremely peace loving religion which has been given a bad reputation by a minority of militants. The Holy Prophet was known for his level of compassion, to the point that when Madina (Where the muslims were protecting themselves from attack from the Makkans) was under attack, the Holy Prophet forbade muslims from chopping down trees (because in the desert trees are a precious commodity) and harming the enemies' women, children and elderly. Muslims were only allowed to harm people waging war. (Which, if you notice, is not what Osama Bin Laden did in 9/11).

The point is the cartoons weren't prooving anything, on the contrary they were inciting the muslims unncessarily and hence were not actually exercising the "Freedom" of speech the way "Freedom" of speech is meant to be.

And this is not just a personal point of view, as you can see in this link http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/20...l.ap/index.html

A British Historian has been jailed for exercising his freedom of speech, just because what he said wasn't exactly "Freedom" of speech.

Welcome Bassaam!!!! Always a pleasure to have more people join the forum, and it is especially nice to have yet another perspective on this debate!!!

The only comment I will make at this time is to point out that the central flaw (in my opinion) of your argument is that it is a tautology. You begin with the assumption that free speech is legitimate only insofar as it promotes certain goods within society, and then define such goods so as to exclude religious criticism. This then (quite predictably) leads you to the conclusion that 'Free Speech' then does not justify a caricature of the prophet.

The underlying problem with this is that it is a slippery slope (in the classical sense), in that you deny that such freedom is a good in and of itself, and only grant it's validity (or legitimacy) insofar as it promotes other (self defined) social ideals. In others words, 'I will support free speech only when it serves to further my own socio-political views'. That is a narrow freedom indeed.

If this viewpoint had been allowed to delineate the historical debate, we would still be stuck in the middle ages, looking for the edge of the world, and burning heretics at the stake. If we are prepared to acknowledge the role of freedom of thought and expression as the vehicle which liberated us from those dark times, why are we so eager to limit its scope today? For such freedom to have any meaning, we must enoy the liberty to criticize all ideas, beliefs, concepts, and philosophies, else it is an arbitrary and illusory freedom at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good.. I accept the invitation, though I came to this website looking for the new McLaren F1 Wallpapers.

Firstly a bit of a background, I am working in Karachi, Pakistan and yes I am a muslim.

I have had this debate with non-muslims before, and the problem is that it is very very difficult to convey the way these images hurt us. Islam does not allow pictures of the Holy Prophet. The Holy Prophet is very integral to our lives, because we believe he led the "perfect life" and aspire to emulate his principles/morals etc.. to our fullest extent.

Making fun/joking about someone we respect so absolutely is bound to create rage amongst the muslim community and that is exactly what has happened.

People will argue that they were exercising their "Freedom" of speech and that this is such a sacred western ideal that it has to be upheld.

But this is an unfair argument, because they make "Freedom" of speech into an ideal in itself and forget why we have Freedom of Speech in the first place. The purpose of Freedom of Speech is to encourage dialougue and identify ills in society. Speech is "free" to the point it promotes upholding of people's rights, identification of wrongs etc.. Freedom of speech was not constituted to allow people to mock religion, etc...

Islam is an extremely peace loving religion which has been given a bad reputation by a minority of militants. The Holy Prophet was known for his level of compassion, to the point that when Madina (Where the muslims were protecting themselves from attack from the Makkans) was under attack, the Holy Prophet forbade muslims from chopping down trees (because in the desert trees are a precious commodity) and harming the enemies' women, children and elderly. Muslims were only allowed to harm people waging war. (Which, if you notice, is not what Osama Bin Laden did in 9/11).

The point is the cartoons weren't prooving anything, on the contrary they were inciting the muslims unncessarily and hence were not actually exercising the "Freedom" of speech the way "Freedom" of speech is meant to be.

And this is not just a personal point of view, as you can see in this link http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/20...l.ap/index.html

A British Historian has been jailed for exercising his freedom of speech, just because what he said wasn't exactly "Freedom" of speech.

:lol: Peace loving religion, god giove me a break, what nonscence. IF your religion was so peace loving then your fellow muslims wouldnt be going around saying that all those wo mock islam should be beheaded. What a lovely religion, i can really see it :lol: Funniest thing ive heard all day.

No offence to you of course but your fellow muslims bring it completely on themselves. and you cant be that peace loving as you regard every other religion etc as a pile of Sh#t and you think every1 shud be muslim. Well let me tell you now, i will never be muslim and i will quite happily rip all your heads off if one of my relatives or anyone i know infact is hurt by one of your extremeist brothers.

I just wish people in the world could learn to accept everyone has different ideas and views and just get on with it. This is why im not religious as its just ****ing stupid and awkward and if one of your ''brothers'' blows sum1 up then your all branded killers n Sh#t. Its stupid. Bloody religion, who needs it!

anyway welcome bassaam, enjoy your stay here, and lets hope your fellow muslims who hate the west can realise than no one person will ever be the same. Lets just hope all these etremeists can just accept the fact there are different races and religions and thats that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: Peace loving religion, god giove me a break, what nonscence. IF your religion was so peace loving then your fellow muslims wouldnt be going around saying that all those wo mock islam should be beheaded. What a lovely religion, i can really see it :lol: Funniest thing ive heard all day.

No offence to you of course but your fellow muslims bring it completely on themselves. and you cant be that peace loving as you regard every other religion etc as a pile of Sh#t and you think every1 shud be muslim. Well let me tell you now, i will never be muslim and i will quite happily rip all your heads off if one of my relatives or anyone i know infact is hurt by one of your extremeist brothers.

I just wish people in the world could learn to accept everyone has different ideas and views and just get on with it. This is why im not religious as its just ****ing stupid and awkward and if one of your ''brothers'' blows sum1 up then your all branded killers n Sh#t. Its stupid. Bloody religion, who needs it!

anyway welcome bassaam, enjoy your stay here, and lets hope your fellow muslims who hate the west can realise than no one person will ever be the same. Lets just hope all these etremeists can just accept the fact there are different races and religions and thats that!

Ben, if you want a more tolerant world, you have to demonstrate it, not just demand it of others.

tsk tsk......... take a deep breath before posting next time, it can help avoid this kind of embarrassment. I know you're a better lad than this post seems to suggest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why, thats my view and i should be allowed to post it. Ill tell you again, if any of my relatives/family are killed by a muslim who blew them up then ill ****ing kill all the muslims and put their heads on great big sticks!

and yes i am very ****ing tolerant. I also find it disgusting how a work collegaue who is Indian had to flee saudi arabia because he was getting dath threats abnd threats by others to rip all his skin off cos he was darker than them. This dosnt sound peace loving to me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: Peace loving religion, god giove me a break, what nonscence. IF your religion was so peace loving then your fellow muslims wouldnt be going around saying that all those wo mock islam should be beheaded. What a lovely religion, i can really see it :lol: Funniest thing ive heard all day.

No offence to you of course but your fellow muslims bring it completely on themselves. and you cant be that peace loving as you regard every other religion etc as a pile of Sh#t and you think every1 shud be muslim. Well let me tell you now, i will never be muslim and i will quite happily rip all your heads off if one of my relatives or anyone i know infact is hurt by one of your extremeist brothers.

I just wish people in the world could learn to accept everyone has different ideas and views and just get on with it. This is why im not religious as its just ****ing stupid and awkward and if one of your ''brothers'' blows sum1 up then your all branded killers n Sh#t. Its stupid. Bloody religion, who needs it!

anyway welcome bassaam, enjoy your stay here, and lets hope your fellow muslims who hate the west can realise than no one person will ever be the same. Lets just hope all these etremeists can just accept the fact there are different races and religions and thats that!

100% warn level

:lol:

and yes i am very ****ing tolerant. I also find it disgusting how a work collegaue who is Indian had to flee saudi arabia because he was getting dath threats abnd threats by others to rip all his skin off cos he was darker than them. This dosnt sound peace loving to me!
well well

if u want to quote indivisual incidents then ....

so can i :naughty:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

go on then. Ill happily listen to everyones POV and if you can change my mind to believe that i shouldnt be protective over my family then go ahead!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why, thats my view and i should be allowed to post it. Ill tell you again, if any of my relatives/family are killed by a muslim who blew them up then ill ****ing kill all the muslims and put their heads on great big sticks!

and yes i am very ****ing tolerant. I also find it disgusting how a work collegaue who is Indian had to flee saudi arabia because he was getting dath threats abnd threats by others to rip all his skin off cos he was darker than them. This dosnt sound peace loving to me!

Okay Ben, then you tell me, what makes you so different from these 'Muslims' you criticize, if you're prepared to take out your retribution on "all the Muslims" as you say, for the offences you "theoretically" lay at the feet of so few?

That is not tolerant, no matter how hard you beat your chest, my young friend. Perhaps you want to consider your own reactions a little more closely. It sounds a little like unbridled and unmitigated rage to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
go on then. Ill happily listen to everyones POV and if you can change my mind to believe that i shouldnt be protective over my family then go ahead!
your posts in this thread are no less "extremist" than any i have read...

you just cant paint everyone with the same brush....

as i and cavallino have demonstrated time and again ..."being muslim" does not mean being an extremist..

and i am not here to change opinions that i know i cant..

that is why the opinion is called an "extremist" rigid opinion

Okay Ben, then you tell me, what makes you so different from these 'Muslims' you criticize, if you're prepared to take out your retribution on "all the Muslims" as you say, for the offences you "theoretically" lay at the feet of so few?

That is not tolerant, no matter how hard you beat your chest, my young friend. Perhaps you want to consider your own reactions a little more closely. It sounds a little like unbridled and unmitigated rage to me.

_>me :beer22: <_ 'Jay

i implied the same thing in the next post which was posted simultaneously :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
why, thats my view and i should be allowed to post it. Ill tell you again, if any of my relatives/family are killed by a muslim who blew them up then ill ****ing kill all the muslims and put their heads on great big sticks!

and yes i am very ****ing tolerant. I also find it disgusting how a work collegaue who is Indian had to flee saudi arabia because he was getting dath threats abnd threats by others to rip all his skin off cos he was darker than them. This dosnt sound peace loving to me!

Oh dear, Ben. Don't you realise that you are saying exactly the same thing as the people you're railing against? And so it continues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well im fed up really, if they can say it then so can I, dosnt mean i will atually go along with it but i find it disgusting how they feel the need to say such disgraceful things. And no, what i am saying is not any worse actually or even close to what they are saying cos im saying it now because im just fed up with them all. Can you not see though the point im trying to make, if people keep saying such things then us british will most probably retalliate and say exactly what I have just said. Im not being a hypocrite or whatever cos what im saying is completely different and im just trying to illustrate that if they dont keep on with such views then this country will not be so tolerent and infact begin to fight back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its clear to me now that Islam is all about killing. Muslims don't give a damn about the families of those innocent people who die

EDIT:// The views expressed herein are not necessarily those held by TotalF1.com blablabla :) Don't generalise too much though, mate. I'm sure we have members of the muslim faith here at the forums as well.

i still have not got a response as to who edited this post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i still have not got a response as to who edited this post

Didn't know you asked.

go on then. Ill happily listen to everyones POV and if you can change my mind to believe that i shouldnt be protective over my family then go ahead!

I don't think anyone is questioning your right to protect your family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:D Boy I stay away for a day and things get all heated up :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
well im fed up really, if they can say it then so can I, dosnt mean i will atually go along with it but i find it disgusting how they feel the need to say such disgraceful things. And no, what i am saying is not any worse actually or even close to what they are saying cos im saying it now because im just fed up with them all. Can you not see though the point im trying to make, if people keep saying such things then us british will most probably retalliate and say exactly what I have just said. Im not being a hypocrite or whatever cos what im saying is completely different and im just trying to illustrate that if they dont keep on with such views then this country will not be so tolerent and infact begin to fight back.

You are being so general in your condemnation I just can't be bothered to argue with you, except to say that you need to calm down and read your own posts. Then you might see what we're saying.

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