Mosques

Talk about just about anything else that is non-gaming here, but keep it clean
User avatar
Octopod
Next-Gen
Posts: 2653
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 9:44 am

Re: Mosques

Post by Octopod »

Niode wrote:Your all wrong.

You're





:D
User avatar
Jrecee
Next-Gen
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:33 pm

Re: Mosques

Post by Jrecee »

Niode wins the debate with 3 words. I should have started off with that.
User avatar
jeffro11
128-bit
Posts: 574
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:27 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Mosques

Post by jeffro11 »

You could have started off with that, then you'd be called a troll. Funny how that works isn't it.
Niode
Next-Gen
Posts: 7831
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 2:34 pm
Location: UK

Re: Mosques

Post by Niode »

Octopod wrote:
Niode wrote:Your all wrong.

You're





:D
Hook. Line. Sinker. Thanks for playing. Toodle-ooo!
Marurun wrote:Don’t mind-shart your pants, guys
Limewater
Next-Gen
Posts: 3392
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 11:01 am
Location: Northern Alabama

Re: Mosques

Post by Limewater »

Jrecee wrote: Your wording saying "a crime that at the time was punishable by death" is what confused me. So it was a crime in god's eyes? Are you suggesting that in the last few thousand years god changed his mind?
Many people believe that G^d has changed His mind in some sense. I do not hold this view.

I do not personally believe that G^d has changed His mind-- just His modus operandi. The Law was given in a time before grace. I am very much in the minority among Christians in believing that the Law still applies. However, Grace overcomes the Law.

If you punch me in the face unprovoked, I would probably punch you back. However, I also believe it would be a sin for me to do so, and I hope that I would not.
Systems: TI-99/4a, Commodore Vic-20, Atari 2600, NES, SMS, GB, Neo Geo MVS (Big Red 4-slot), Genesis, SNES, 3DO, PS1, N64, DC, PS2, GBA, GCN, NDSi, Wii
Jimmy Yakapucci
64-bit
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 9:34 pm

Re: Mosques

Post by Jimmy Yakapucci »

Jrecee wrote:
AppleQueso wrote:talkorigins.org has a lot of info. Although much of it circulates around refuting creationist claims and general misconceptions about evolution, it's probably the most comprehensive website I know of off the top of my head.
Do you know any good books on evolution that aren't written for people getting their doctorate in evolutionary biology?
Try reading "Bones of Contention". I forgot the author's name. It is a book taking the fossil record from a creationist view. Yes, there is religious stuff in the book, but you can skip over that and just read the technical stuff.

JY
Jimmy Yakapucci
64-bit
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 9:34 pm

Re: Mosques

Post by Jimmy Yakapucci »

Back to the whole mosque thing. Originally I had no problem with the building of the mosque near "ground zero". (Geez I hate that term). Then someone, I wish that I could remember who and where, was commenting that it is/was a common practice for practitioners of Islam to build a mosque on ground that they had conquered. Taken in that light, it doesn't seem so innocent. Just wish that I could remember where I heard that so I could do some checking and verifying.

JY
AppleQueso

Re: Mosques

Post by AppleQueso »

Jimmy Yakapucci wrote:
Jrecee wrote:
AppleQueso wrote:talkorigins.org has a lot of info. Although much of it circulates around refuting creationist claims and general misconceptions about evolution, it's probably the most comprehensive website I know of off the top of my head.
Do you know any good books on evolution that aren't written for people getting their doctorate in evolutionary biology?
Try reading "Bones of Contention". I forgot the author's name. It is a book taking the fossil record from a creationist view. Yes, there is religious stuff in the book, but you can skip over that and just read the technical stuff.

JY
...and like most creationist babble, the book's entire premise is based on misrepresenting data and evolutionary theory itself.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_lubenow.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/lubenow_cg.html
Jimmy Yakapucci wrote:Back to the whole mosque thing. Originally I had no problem with the building of the mosque near "ground zero". (Geez I hate that term). Then someone, I wish that I could remember who and where, was commenting that it is/was a common practice for practitioners of Islam to build a mosque on ground that they had conquered. Taken in that light, it doesn't seem so innocent. Just wish that I could remember where I heard that so I could do some checking and verifying.

JY
because all muslims are extremist terrorists collaborating to take over the world!!!
User avatar
Jrecee
Next-Gen
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 10:33 pm

Re: Mosques

Post by Jrecee »

Jimmy Yakapucci wrote:
Try reading "Bones of Contention". I forgot the author's name. It is a book taking the fossil record from a creationist view. Yes, there is religious stuff in the book, but you can skip over that and just read the technical stuff.

JY
"Fossil Record" and "Creationist View" are two things that don't go together under any circumstances. Although I'd almost like to read this book for a laugh.

In high school we were supposed to write a paper arguing a point opposite of what we would usually argue. I thought I'd write about how carbon dating could be incorrect. I started researching and quickly had to change my topic, because there was virtually no information that could logically support that view. The only websites out there debating it were completely and obviously religious run.

It seems to me if there was any weakness in a scientific process that was so extensive, there would be non-religious scientists debating it as well, but that's not the case. There's not a single non-bible thumper out there arguing that the world might be 6000 years old or that a flintstones like Caveman/Dinosaur world could have been possible.
msimplay
64-bit
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2006 4:13 am

Re: Mosques

Post by msimplay »

Jimmy Yakapucci wrote:Back to the whole mosque thing. Originally I had no problem with the building of the mosque near "ground zero". (Geez I hate that term). Then someone, I wish that I could remember who and where, was commenting that it is/was a common practice for practitioners of Islam to build a mosque on ground that they had conquered. Taken in that light, it doesn't seem so innocent. Just wish that I could remember where I heard that so I could do some checking and verifying.

JY
In relation to this people always point to "well all Muslims are not terrorists only a minority are" and I can agree to that however minorities also rule whole countries such as our respective governments.
In relation to minorities very powerful people who just so happen to be Muslim do hold such views such as practitioners of Islam building mosques on the lands they have conquered. I have to say when you look at the situation it won't have been the majority who would have planned the building of the mosque in the first place as Muslim communities probably already have a mosque they congregate in.
So the question arises here whoever is responsible for the building of this mosque.
What are their motives ?

I just personally think that its a bit of a spit in the faces of the families of those victims who died in the 9/11 bombings.
I mean we always talk about sensitivities of religion and prejudice but what about those people who were the real victims of this crime for some reason religious sensitivities seem to mean more than our lives.

Otherwise I couldn't give a rats ass where they build a mosque as it's nothing to do with me :p
Post Reply