Curious- does this forum still ban for islamophobia, xenophobia, etc?

[emprworm]

Or have the mods finally grown a backbone.  This is still the only religion, philosophy, and politics forum I have ever seen that bans for xenophobia and islamophobia.  hahaha

[Edric O]

We ban for excessive flaming of a xenophobic or islamophobic nature - or more generally, we ban for excessive flaming of any kind. You were banned once in the past (a temporary ban, mind you) for calling Muslims "animals." We would give a temporary ban to anyone who called any group of people "animals," or some other similarly bad insult.

Generally speaking, insulting an individual you're talking to on the forum is fine. You can debate a Muslim and call him whatever you like. Insulting a large group of people, none of whom are present in the discussion, however, is not acceptable.

We're a smaller and more tight-knit community than we used to be, so we put more emphasis on the idea that people here should be friendly to each other. Even in PRP. We haven't had a real flame-fest for a long time.

[emprworm]

I see.

So holding the reasonable position that Islam is, at its core, a violent, uncivil reigion, and that peaceful muslims represent a departure from pure Islam would be deemed bannable "Islamophobia".

Furthermore, holding the view that Muslims who issue fatwas against cartoonists, demand death penalties for teachers who name teddy bears Muhammad, and who detonate themselves around children are lower than animals (i.e. I value my pet dog over an Imam who issues fatwas against cartoonists....to call such people animals is an injustice to animals.  I have grown to love and appreciate animals over the last 2 years)....such would be worthy of ban?  Am I right to assume the mods here would still implement such an action? 

I do apologize for insulting the animal kingdom 2 years ago.  I have grown fond of canines, and the beauty of life on this planet.  Dogs deserve better than to be compared to Imams who issue fatwas against cartoonists and school teachers.

I see little has changed here.  Ahh well.  I'll check back in another 2 years and see if the mods have grown a spine.

[Edric O]

So holding the reasonable position that Islam is, at its core, a violent, uncivil reigion, and that peaceful muslims represent a departure from pure Islam would be deemed bannable "Islamophobia".

Actually, no, that is not a bannable offence, if you say it the way you just did. When it comes to whether something is bannable or not, how you say it matters much more than what you are saying. We don't ban people for their opinions - we ban people for acting badly and flaming. You could calmly say that you wish the destruction of the entire human race and we wouldn't ban you. We would, however, ban someone who said things like "DIE, HUMANS!!!!111"

Furthermore, holding the view that Muslims who issue fatwas against cartoonists, demand death penalties for teachers who name teddy bears Muhammad, and who detonate themselves around children are lower than animals (i.e. I value my pet dog over an Imam who issues fatwas against cartoonists....to call such people animals is an injustice to animals.  I have grown to love and appreciate animals over the last 2 years)....such would be worthy of ban?

If they were not Muslims, but did the same things, would it make a difference? An islamophobe is a person who believes that a Muslim who does X is worse than a non-Muslim who does the exact same thing.

Oh, and no, what you said above would not be worth a ban, for two reasons. First, because you said it calmly. Secondly, because you're talking specifically of Muslims guilty of crimes, rather than Muslims in general.

Am I right to assume the mods here would still implement such an action?

I can only speak for myself, of course, but I seem to be the most active mod at the moment. Mahdi, Gob, Nema or Caid might have different standards.

I have grown to love and appreciate animals over the last 2 years

Awww, you're growing soft in your old age. ;)

[emprworm]

But I believe Muslims in general are deceived by a violent uncivil religion.    I hold no reverence for Mohammad, and neither would I ever revere him.  Am I required to be 'respectful' of Mohammad here?  Mohammad married a 13 year old girl, his own cousin.  There are words like incest and pedophillia that come to mind.

So when I insult Mohammad, and when I offer him no reverence, but instead insult him, I am insulting nearly the entire group of over 1 billion Muslims.  Shouldn't that be worthy of a ban on this forum?

PS:  oops, he married a 9 year old, not a 13 year old, sorry

[emprworm]

I mean I actually had the idea for Qur'anic toilet paper.  Little Koran's embedded on each sheet.  Although I'm sure I'd be killed for producing it, but I thought it was a great idea for an invention.  By the way, if anyone wants to take that idea and market it, you can have it.

[emprworm]

Here is my feeling about the entire middle east.  Other than Algebra, which one could argue was not a Muslim-influenced invention (in other words, Algebra would have came out of paganism), the Middle East has given the world nothing.  Zippo.  The don't produce any manufactured goods.  They don't have universities.  They don't produce scientists...or engineers, or artists.  They don't add to technology.  The Arab world is basically good for oil, and that is not a credit to Islam.  The religion of Islam, I believe, is directly to blame for the lack of contribution the Arab world makes to this planet.

So they have lots of oil, that everyone else uses, hence giving Islam a lot of wealth.

My whole take on it is this:  I hope gasoline goes up, triples in prices, so that science and industry is compelled by force to invent efficient mechanisms of utilizing alternative energy.  This will cause the world's dependence on oil to plummet.  And as a result, the middle east will go bankrupt. 

I would be very happy about that.  No more buying guns from Russia and nuclear power plants from France, because they wont afford it.

[Edric O]

Being a Christian, I do not revere Muhammad either, and I really have no opinion on him as a person. Yes, he married a 9 year old girl - and ancient Greek philosophers had sex with young boys, the entire ancient world's economy was based on large scale slavery, Julius Caesar boasted of having killed a million Gauls, the Romans thought that watching people hack each other to death in the arena was great fun, etc. That doesn't mean I hate philosophy or believe that nothing good ever came out of the ancient world. Most important historical figures - all the way up to the present - are guilty of at least some innocent deaths. Many of the people we consider great heroes or thinkers in previous centuries were murderers or worse (it is only recently that killing lots of people stopped being a cool thing to do - Hitler was just born in the wrong century). If you applied modern standards to historical leaders and events, you'd have to conclude that, until very recently, just about everyone (with a few exceptions) was evil and depraved.

So, if I can call Socrates a great philosopher even though he owned slaves and had sex with young boys, I can certainly call Muhammad a great religious leader.

Having said that, to answer your question - I don't know. I wouldn't ban you for insulting Muhammad, since that is insulting one individual and not a whole group of people, and all important historical figures should be fair game. Other mods might be more strict, though. You'll have to ask them.

[emprworm]

and finally, before the mods consider whether this forum can adequately tolerate my views, I want to add that I see Islam as the single biggest social threat on this planet.  I view Islam as a threat to world civility and the largest obstacle in the future of human progress.

Europe, with its wide open "lets embrace the world" ideology is turning against itself as foolishness.  Open wide the gates in the name of diversity, and see how a society is distentigrated from the inside.  Last I heard the Netherlands at least wisened up and started locking down its immigration laws.  Letting Mohammadans pour in unchecked into your borders is a cultural death sentence.  Do you love your country?  Do you value your culture?  Then you have to control....with a tight grip...Islamic immigration.

Countries in Europe have to start really locking down the ability of Muslims to immigrate.  Eventually, if they do not, it will be too late because they will make up a percentage of the population too large to politically overcome.  Many politicians understand this, the problem is that as soon as you voice that opinion, you are deemed a "hatemonger".

The infiltration of radical Islam into the Netherlands, Britain, France, Canada, and other parts of Europe is a breeding ground of nesting wasps that are eventually going to sting-  and its going to be a very painful sting.

I am actually not alone in this assessment.  There are many people, well known centrists, scholars, published authors, and others who hold such a view.

I would like to know if the other mods on this forum can tolerate such a view, or is it bannable islamophobia?

[emprworm]

"So, if I can call Socrates a great philosopher even though he owned slaves and had sex with young boys, I can certainly call Muhammad a great religious leader."

I can call Hitler a brilliant military strategist.  THe difference here is that Mohammad is a role model, the highest example of which all Muslims should imitate.

I sure hope you wouldn't advocate imitating Socrates.  I admire Mohammad as a military conquerer.  He was genious.  I detest him as an example upon which one should imitate.

I know of no one who advocates imitating Socrates.  I know of say....roughly 1 billion people who consider Mohammads life the supreme example upon which to imitate.

[Edric O]

Here is my feeling about the entire middle east.  Other than Algebra, which one could argue was not a Muslim-influenced invention (in other words, Algebra would have came out of paganism), the Middle East has given the world nothing. Zippo.

Agriculture. The wheel. Architecture. Writing. Irrigation. Government. Monotheism. Christianity. Just a few things off the top of my head that were invented in the (ancient) Middle East. It is the cradle of human civilization, after all, and the site of the first cities.

Yeah, the Middle East hasn't been at the forefront of innovation recently, but history isn't over yet. When your history stretches back 5000 years, a few centuries here and there don't matter all that much.

Besides, judging a whole country or culture by the number of things it has "given the world" is silly, because for the most part it means judging them by the number of things you know about that are made or invented there, and because not all countries were created equal. It's no wonder that irrigation was invented by people living close to the desert - because they need it. People living in a place with abundant rainfall would probably never invent irrigation, no matter how smart they were. Necessity is the mother of invention - people invent things if they need solutions to problems. If you never had the problem, you'd never invent the solution. That doesn't mean your culture is inferior. Europeans were lucky to have a specific set of problems that eventually led to them inventing industry - and it all took off from there.

They don't have universities. They don't produce scientists...or engineers, or artists.

Ummm, yes they do, actually. Who do you think looks after the Aswan Dam, or makes Arabic music? Or do you mean you've never heard of any of them? That's different.

The religion of Islam, I believe, is directly to blame for the lack of contribution the Arab world makes to this planet.

Explain why.

So they have lots of oil, that everyone else uses, hence giving Islam a lot of wealth.

What would you reply if they said Allah blessed them with oil?

My whole take on it is this: I hope gasoline goes up, triples in prices, so that science and industry is compelled by force to invent efficient mechanisms of utilizing alternative energy.  This will cause the world's dependence on oil to plummet. And as a result, the middle east will go bankrupt. 

I would be very happy about that. No more buying guns from Russia and nuclear power plants from France, because they wont afford it.

For once we agree.

One point though: The most populous country in the Middle East, Egypt, doesn't rely on oil. When the oil runs out, the hardest hit will be the despotic monarchies of the Gulf, plus, of course, Saudi Arabia. I hope they finally get rid of their corrupt, oppressive royal families when that happens.

[Caid Ivik]

"So, if I can call Socrates a great philosopher even though he owned slaves and had sex with young boys, I can certainly call Muhammad a great religious leader."

I can call Hitler a brilliant military strategist.  THe difference here is that Mohammad is a role model, the highest example of which all Muslims should imitate.

I sure hope you wouldn't advocate imitating Socrates.  I admire Mohammad as a military conquerer.  He was genious.  I detest him as an example upon which one should imitate.

I know of no one who advocates imitating Socrates.  I know of say....roughly 1 billion people who consider Mohammads life the supreme example upon which to imitate.

A believer doesn't imitate a life of a prophet, actually this would be a blasphemy in both islam and christian religions too. But similarily as christianity, even islam has an ability to incite a stronger determination than any secular ideology, or culture. The western culture promotes emotions before reason now, so it is a matter of time, until the stronger takes over. The next century belongs to religions, if you like it or not. There is also nothing to defend, because the values, which are defined by today's majority will be assimilated and reformulated by the tommorow's one in such a way, that you won't even notice it.

[Edric O]

I want to add that I see Islam as the single biggest social threat on this planet. I view Islam as a threat to world civility and the largest obstacle in the future of human progress.

You give far too much credit to a small band of Muslim extremists with a lot of fame but very little actual power. I will say this: Even Bin Laden himself is no real threat. He is a joke. More people die from car accidents than are killed by terrorist attacks. That's pretty pathetic.

Besides - random, scattered terrorist attacks never destroyed a government, a social system, or a way of life. When Islamic extremists get an army, tanks, planes, and helicopters, then I'll be worried. Until then, I couldn't give a damn about them. Armies can topple governments. A few bombs every few years can't.

Europe, with its wide open "lets embrace the world" ideology is turning against itself as foolishness. Open wide the gates in the name of diversity, and see how a society is distentigrated from the inside. Last I heard the Netherlands at least wisened up and started locking down its immigration laws. Letting Mohammadans pour in unchecked into your borders is a cultural death sentence.

1. Define "culture." What is under threat, exactly? What will change? If it's not something we deem important in the first place, why should we care?

2. Explain why you believe that when a small Muslim population meets a much larger non-Muslim population, the Muslims will influence the non-Muslims but not the other way around.

3. Explain why you do not believe that Western societies will have the same effect of Islam that they had on Christianity. Religious belief on the whole is declining in the West. Why should Islam be an exception? What makes it so much stronger than any other religion?

4. Note that Europe is already very strict on immigration - much more so than the US. According to the CIA World Factbook, the net immigration rate for the European Union is 1.46 migrants/1,000 population. For the United States it is 2.92 migrants/1,000 population.

Do you love your country?

No. I love Humanity. Which is why I find it difficult to care which parts of Humanity live where.

Do you value your culture?

Not particularly, no. What is "culture" anyway?

Countries in Europe have to start really locking down the ability of Muslims to immigrate.  Eventually, if they do not, it will be too late because they will make up a percentage of the population too large to politically overcome. Many politicians understand this, the problem is that as soon as you voice that opinion, you are deemed a "hatemonger".

There is a very good reason for that. Europeans are rightfully suspicious of the belief that a person's character, political views, and life choices are primarily determined by race or ethnicity, because in the past this belief caused wars upon wars in Europe, and unleashed rivers of blood across the continent again and again.

Tens of millions of people died in Europe because of nationalism. That is why we are far less nationalistic than Americans.

The infiltration of radical Islam into the Netherlands, Britain, France, Canada, and other parts of Europe is a breeding ground of nesting wasps that are eventually going to sting-  and its going to be a very painful sting.

O RLY? What is going to happen, exactly?

I would like to know if the other mods on this forum can tolerate such a view, or is it bannable islamophobia?

I wouldn't ban you. I will, however, refer to you as a nationalist.

I can call Hitler a brilliant military strategist. The difference here is that Mohammad is a role model, the highest example of which all Muslims should imitate.

Yes, but the role model doesn't extend to every single aspect of Muhammad's life. Jesus is a role model for us Christians, but that doesn't mean we should all be carpenters. The role model doesn't extend to sexual behaviour, either. Jesus was celibate. Most Christians are not.

[Gobalopper]

Who is this emprworm guy? Heh, it has been awhile but welcome back.

And just so you know emprworm I just recently travelled to Pakistan and I met a lot of Muslims while I was there. I wouldn't call any of them animals in fact all of them were very kind and welcoming to us. And yes they knew we were Christian and from the "West".

[Anathema]

I can call Hitler a brilliant military strategist.

Good point, bad example though  :D

Welcome back!

(And hurrah for Orange!)

[Mihail]

Oh...

*contented sigh*

I'll try to get involved in the morning. But right now it's good to see you back, emprworm. :)

[Anathema]

I suppose I could add this little bit before I get to sleep: religions don't kill people, people kill people.

Perhaps being a muslim makes one more prone to be offended by such western principles as free speech or whatnot, and because of that potentially more violent in western environments. (I'm being cynical here, not relativist)

I have my reservations about Islam as well but I try to give individuals the benefit of doubt regardless of what group they're a part of.

I'm usually annoyed when our politicians talk about Islam. On the one hand we have Wilders with his reactionary views (and usually does a sloppy job of defending them, so he's not even interesting to listen to)

On the other hand there are still people, who aren't themselves muslim, who are compelled to stress that Islam is a religion of peace and think that subsidizing the construction of mosques is a good way to improve integration. Sigh...

[SWkwisatz]

"But I believe Muslims in general are deceived by a violent uncivil religion."

And how is Christianity any better?

- Between 4th-6th centuries, thousands of pagan believers were slain. And this was made possible by Christian authorities.

- The estimated kills during the Christian Crusades between 1095-1291 are between 1-5 million people.

- The witch hunts lead to several hundred thousand deaths.

- Historians have found that as early as in the 4th and 5th centuries synagogues were burned by Christians. I'm guessing that

  you know your history and that you probably know that it most certainly didn’t end there.

This list can go on and on.

"Other than Algebra, which one could argue was not a Muslim-influenced invention (in other words, Algebra would have came out of paganism), the Middle East has given the world nothing.  Zippo.  The don't produce any manufactured goods.  They don't have universities.  They don't produce scientists...or engineers, or artists."

This actually says a lot about how little you know of what you're talking about.

"Europe, with its wide open "lets embrace the world" ideology is turning against itself as foolishness.  Open wide the gates in the name of diversity, and see how a society is distentigrated from the inside.  Last I heard the Netherlands at least wisened up and started locking down its immigration laws.  Letting Mohammadans pour in unchecked into your borders is a cultural death sentence.  Do you love your country?  Do you value your culture?  Then you have to control....with a tight grip...Islamic immigration.

Countries in Europe have to start really locking down the ability of Muslims to immigrate.  Eventually, if they do not, it will be too late because they will make up a percentage of the population too large to politically overcome."

Have we been reading a little too much Eurabian literature? It seems you either already are, or could be, particularly fond of Bruce Bawer.

The big question is also what cultures are we actually talking of defending here in Europe? Because this claim of defending “the culture”, “the country” or “the people” isn’t new, it’s so old and such a simple way of disregarding everything that is “different” or isn’t like “us”. And to be perfectly honest I think later authors like, the already mentioned, Bawer have had a better argument for the cause than you (even though his analysis and conclusions have no empirical grounds whatsoever).

Also I would recommend you to read at least a little postcolonial theory, even though I guess that you won’t be interested and most certainly will disregard it as rubbish. Also worth to mention, cultures aren't static, as you try to make them. Cultures change over time, it always has done and it always will do. "Our culture" (whatever that means) will also change no matter what conservative people like yourself think of it.

[emprworm]

I'll respond to just the main fallacies of Edric, the ticky tack items I wont bother with.

Yes, but the role model doesn't extend to every single aspect of Muhammad's life. Jesus is a role model for us Christians, but that doesn't mean we should all be carpenters. The role model doesn't extend to sexual behaviour, either. Jesus was celibate. Most Christians are not.

The term, Edric, is Moral Authority.   Moral authority combined with divine directives makes for a very dangerous formula if the individual with moral authority who should be morally imitated is one of a vile nature.

Your comparison to Jesus being a carpenter and a directive to imitate his profession as an equivalence to Mohammad as a moral authority and a directive to imitate his moral life is laughable. Cmon Edric.  Even I acknowledge when u have a good point and I wont argue just for the sake of argument.

Agriculture. The wheel. Architecture. Writing. Irrigation. Government. Monotheism. Christianity. Just a few things off the top of my head that were invented in the (ancient) Middle East. It is the cradle of human civilization, after all, and the site of the first cities.

I thought it was implied (but perhaps not) I am referring to ISLAMIC culture.  Algebra was invented very close to the birth of Islam.  Interesting isn't it....how all those great inventions came from the middle east....until Islam showed up.

1. Define "culture." What is under threat, exactly? What will change? If it's not something we deem important in the first place, why should we care?

social identity, the most basic definition but also the most important one.  Usually, in life, people without an identity are miserable.  Usually, in life, people who don't belong to something greater than themselves, are unhappy.  Culture answers both of those questions.  But you know this.

2. Explain why you believe that when a small Muslim population meets a much larger non-Muslim population, the Muslims will influence the non-Muslims but not the other way around.

Because the larger population is a leftist "lets embrace diversity" population that loves to bow down to minority groups, giving them more rights than everyone else (i.e. east indians in canada who become police officers get to wear turbans in uniform.  East indian students get to carry daggers in public schools...this is cultural pandering by leftist governments)

3. Explain why you do not believe that Western societies will have the same effect of Islam that they had on Christianity. Religious belief on the whole is declining in the West. Why should Islam be an exception? What makes it so much stronger than any other religion?

because western society is all about accepting others, not changing them.  Western society embraces, so it will change nothing.  Believe me, the Muslims have no desire to change.  Look at Britain, it is getting more fundamental all the time.

4. Note that Europe is already very strict on immigration - much more so than the US. According to the CIA World Factbook, the net immigration rate for the European Union is 1.46 migrants/1,000 population. For the United States it is 2.92 migrants/1,000 population.

Of course!   More people worlwide want to come to the US than any other. Despite how hated it is, it is a great country to live in.

Its not a migrant problem...its an Islamic migrant problem.  10% of France right now is Islamic.  The most nuclear country on earth is 10% Muslim.  How long until a Muslim cleric is elected president?  Did you know Edric that its possible for a democracy to elect a dictator?  Adlof anyone?

[emprworm]

"But I believe Muslims in general are deceived by a violent uncivil religion."

And how is Christianity any better?

Because Christianity evolved into a civil institution.  There are no longer any countries on earth with imposed Christianity, or people living under Christian dictators that demand obedience to the Pope. 

Islam still is very much in the 8th century.  Its time you stopped using 1000 year old arguments as a present critique on christianity- especially when you compare it to present day wide-spread Islamic depravity.

[emprworm]

Who is this emprworm guy? Heh, it has been awhile but welcome back.

And just so you know emprworm I just recently travelled to Pakistan and I met a lot of Muslims while I was there. I wouldn't call any of them animals in fact all of them were very kind and welcoming to us. And yes they knew we were Christian and from the "West".

Just to be clear on my position:

I view Islam as a whole to be, at its core, an oppressive and violent religion.  I do not see all Muslims as violent, (though women throughout the middle east are oppressed)

The "animals" are not all Muslims, but are specifically those who are leaders (such as Imams) who propogate a form of Islam that demands fatwas against cartoonists.  Additionally, the "animals" are the homicide bombers who kill for Allah, and in the name of Allah.  They are less than animals to me, because I don't want to insult the animal kingdom.

My hair stylist is a Muslim and I love talking to him so I completely agree that plenty of Muslims are good people.  The fact that many of these good Muslims are complacent and do not speak out against the extremists is disturbing, but that doesn't make them sub-human to me.  The subhuman ones, in my view, are those who teach violence towards infidels, and those who carry it out (note:  it is not necessarily the case that one who teaches violence IS violent.  Manson never killed anyone, but he is just as vile, if not more so, than those who actually did.  Therefore, I classify "animals" as those who teach violence in the name of Allah, and those who carry it out.   The rest of the Muslim world to me is simply deceived, they are certainly not subhuman).

And thanks for the welcome, though I anticipate it will be short lived, haha.  If the xenophobia tag doesn't get tossed on me soon, I'm sure it will be something else.  I'm here to fight against Islam....its what I call the "unholy Jihad".  I stand against Islam and its oppression of Women.  Of course there are other things too, but thats the big one.

[emprworm]

  Also worth to mention, cultures aren't static, as you try to make them. Cultures change over time, it always has done and it always will do. "Our culture" (whatever that means) will also change no matter what conservative people like yourself think of it.

Unless you are Islamic culture.  In 1400 years, it has changed very little.  Interesting that its western people who don't know what "culture" is when it comes to their own.  Ironically, they can easily identify it in others, just not in themselves. That is because western socialized leftism has deemed that their own culture is insignificant, and its role is to lift up all other cultures.  We don't see East Indians moving to Canada sacrificing their culture, they keep it, and preserve it.  We don't see Native Americans sacrificing their culture because they live amongst the white man, they keep it.  We don't see immigrating Albanians tossing aside their culture, they keep it.  All of these minority groups not only have a culture, they know their culture, and the western country hosting them recognizes their culture.

So while someone who lives in France says "What is culture?"  The French government has already formally recognized an Arab culture.  You want to be culture-neutral and that is the problem.  All these western people who want "culture-neutral" at the same time are "culture-propogating".  They deny their own culture, while recognizing everyone else's distinct culture.

The 8th century Arab culture demands Sharia law.  They are demanding it in Canada, Britain, and France.  Will you give it to them?

Islam is a threat to the western world.  The religion spawns violence and oppression.  I am still looking for the fruits of Islam that have benefited human growth.

[Andrew]

Posting in epic thread!

Because Christianity evolved into a civil institution.  There are no longer any countries on earth with imposed Christianity, or people living under Christian dictators that demand obedience to the Pope. 

I'm pretty sure Bush is a Christian and has used his political influence against abortions, gay marriage, and stem cell research and to invade Muslim countries. So to say that Christians do not impose their beliefs or morality upon others is silly.

Dubai is embracing capitalism. It is a Muslim place.

Are you saying having 25% of world cranes is not progress? What about setting structural world records for almost everything? image

Sure lots of the Middle East has not made huge progress as the western world has, but I don't think that means they are all stuck in the stone age (ok so maybe lots are, but how does that make them worse than us?). Unless you are saying Christian parts of Africa are still in the stone age and thus they are as primitive as Muslims in Middle East.

So are homeless and low income people (say Christians) in North America who engage in drugs and other illegal activities as low as Muslims that just try to get by in life without ever engaging in terrorism (but maybe have resentment against Western countries for constantly invading their countries)?

If there are 1 billion Muslims, I'm pretty sure if they were all terrorists western society would have been damaged greatly by now.

Some parts of their culture clash with western society (womens rights, extremism, religion, free speech), but who is to judge them? As long as they are not forcing us to change our way of life, then who cares? I do oppose their views on womens rights and freedom of speech/press.

You're more likely to die driving down the street than to die from a terrorist attack.

Hmm, lets see what the tally for terrorist attacks is in my province.

1 - white guy against the government that set up several bombs and tried to blow up the Province House and succeeded in blowing up a bomb next to the building (birthplace of Canada as a country).

0 - Muslim terrorist attempting to blow anything up or forcing their beleifs upon me.

So far I'm more scared of a crazy neighbour with a drug/alcohol/gambling/mental problem than a Muslim killing me for my beliefs. And maybe that has to do with 95% of the population being  of European descent. But Europeans seem to have no problem taking vacation in UAE and surrounding areas.

[SWkwisatz]

Well I realize you will go on forever. The majority of your arguments are sentimental and aren

[emprworm]

"I'm pretty sure Bush is a Christian and has used his political influence against abortions, gay marriage, and stem cell research and to invade Muslim countries. So to say that Christians do not impose their beliefs or morality upon others is silly."

LMAO.  Thats so identical to a muslim dictator giving people 40 lashes for blaspheming mohammad.  Thats just the same thing as someone killinng in the name of Jesus....as the person is beheaded you here "Jesus Ackbar!"  Uh huh....its the same thing!  Maybe Joseph Stalin killed 30 million in the name of Atheism!  That makes atheism much worse, no?  What a silly argument.  Bush is irrelevant, no one is killed in the name of Jesus. 

Here's a challenge for you.  Take your silly argument, go to Saudi Arabia, and say Mohammad was a false prophet.  Oh how fast you will be thrown in prison or killed....legally!  I live in the US...under Bush, and I have the freedom to say anything I want, even if its anti-Jesus.  I wont get beheaded, and if I did, it would be illegal. 

What a silly argument.  Cmon guys, you are better than this.