I don't think you understand what the word 'assumption' means. By all means go ahead and spill all the insider information you have of the U.S. military's brainwashing techniques. Here is the proper usage of the word 'assumption': You made an assumption about my credibility and intelligence on the basis of me being a former service member.
no more violent than christianity- as for today, you could make a strong argument that christian nations have been involved in more violent conquests in the last 500 years than muslims have. in the past century the bulk of wars have involved nations with predominately christian people.
What wars in the past 100 years were perpetuated based on Christian doctrine? Bulk of wars invlolving nations with Christians as the majority population has nothing to do with Chiristianty but rather that the hegemon power of the world resides in a nation that has a Christian majority. Throughout any point in history, the hegemon power has always been invloved in major warfare. You act as if a Muslim dominant nation was the hegemon, the state of affairs would be better.
Yes, you seem angry. As far as DD goes, he hates Christianity as well. He hates organized religion. ATW is a troll, and everyone knows how he feels about Islam, he does not like it.... nothing new learned there. As far as IZAK goes, he also hates gays and any number of other groups of people as well... As far as being "better" than "them", not sure being better than the **** on the bottom of my boot is much to aspire to.
lets be real, here there is a separation between a conflict that has political motivation or religious motivation. most of the major conflicts that have ever taken place in history have been done for economic/political gain rather than religious. religion is just a tool used to propagate or marginalize opinion in favor of one side. in the case of the US's hegemony i would not go as far to say there were no elements of superior race, culture, or religion used to rile support against the savage and ignorant nations of the world.
We don't live in the era of the conquistadors buddy. We live in the era of nation states where self preservation is more important than anything else.
self preservation by insuring a free flowing global economic system where influence over other nations is prized more than delusional patriotic slogans.
You know nothing about me mate. I don't hate anyone based on race or religion, and I don't have anything against Muslims. I'm not a fan of any of religions, especially the Islamic doctrine, but that doesn't mean I hate Muslims. The question was 'Is Islam the most violent religion?' I gave quotes directly from Quran & Hadithto support my stance...you gave outdated & non-related stats. What race is Islam? Somewhere a village is missing it's idiot...
Show me one post anywhere that I've said that I hate gay people or any other group...you can't, because I've never said it. Just because I'm not a rainbow flag waving gay rights supporter doesn't mean I hate homosexuals. I've always said, 'to each their own, but it's not my cup of tea.' ...but whatever, y'all like to put labels on people who don't agree with your short sighted opinions.
Yea we do, it just takes different forms. Borders are becoming meaningless and the only thing that matters is gold.
Worldwide violence and war are trending down and have for a long, long time. The world has frankly never been safer. The one stat that is increasing, is religious violence in general, with Muslims taking the majority market share in that one, if we are to believe the statistics of Sam Harris (which I only have in dead tree format and can't easily find, much less copy and paste). Most of it, however is sectarian, Shiite vs Sunni (like most of the terrorism in Iraq or Lebanon) or places where large Muslim populations are near Hindu, Christian, Animist or even Buddhist ones (especially Sri Lanka, where Muslims are often the victims of Buddhist religious violence, and India, where they are often the victims of Hindu extremists). I don't think the actual religion itself (as in, the core beliefs and texts) is any more violent than its cousins, but it's surely not any more peaceful. It's adherents are just less likely to cherry pick which bits are ok to ignore. Ignore enough, and you are by definition a secular person. No matter how you self-identify, "true believers" of one's own religion will see you as an apostate for not believing in the less comfortable tennants of the faith you were told to follow since birth. Visit any Southern Baptist seminary or Orthodox yeshiva and provide evidence that Sumerians invented glue seven thousand years ago, and see how far that gets you in a room full of religious authorities who "know" with absolute conviction that the world is only 6000 years old. Religious (and it should be repeated sectarian) violence is on the upswing everywhere except the Americas. All religions are capable of violence, especially when they come in contact with other religions, but if any deserves the title "religion of peace" it is without a doubt Jainism, which has the strictest prohibition on harm to any living creature and is far older than Judaism. It's erroneous to attribute Christianity to MLK's non-violent resistance, as he was heavily influenced by Mahatma Gandhi's own non-violence, which he in turn was influenced by India's Jain scholars and not his own Hinduism. So if you have any stock in the outcome of these radical ideologies overcoming the conventional wisdom of the god-fearing set in our recent past, you know who to thank. Of course, the historical lesson of Jainism is troubling. It's been in decline since the 8th century. It's tough to live by principles of non-violence and acceptance of others when all the other religions surrounding you are informed by strict commandments to kill or convert all non-belivers. Admitedly, it's not terribly fun, Jainism, and would seem very difficult to practice. It's a tough sell. Strict vegetarianism, aesetic living, and rules of conduct requiring complete non-violence, no death penalty for any perceived crime or moral outrage, no circumcisions, no awesome afterlife for rewarding only the true believers, and so on...but if anyone is going to claim to be the religion of peace, you're not going to beat the Jains.
