🤦‍♂️ Every accusation is an admission.
Back at you, with specific recent examples.

Maggot Republicans- the party of Death that caused 1000000+ avoidable American deaths and said grandpa would literally rather die than social distance, the party of Destruction tried (and are still trying) to destroy democracy, the economy, and the constitution over sour grapes, and the party of Debauchery that fights hard in state governments to keep pre teen child brides legal for their pedophile benefactors like Epstein and members like pussy grabbing philandering rapist Trump who bought miss Teen USA for the purpose of barging into the dressing room and leering at naked young teen girls, which he specifically bragged about on air with Stern.

Typically, you like to whine “death destruction and debauchery” with no facts or examples attached and I, once again, offer you a myriad of actual examples. You never learn. Every time you spout this bullshit, I have to rub your nose in it. I think you’ve developed a taste for it. I can provide 10 verified examples for every accusation you lob, as I think I’ve proven….so I can only believe you love being proven a shit eating fool.

One half is happy in school, the other half is a child bride/slave who would be murdered for trying to go to school?

Yes yes, of course it's "harmless"; no one's getting their clit cut off, or being sold as a child bride, or being beaten to a pulp, etc.

That being said, the fact that this "humorous" equation between wife and property, an equation which echoes the true tradition of marriage, can be so easily dismissed by some just illustrates how easy it is to ignore/forget the struggle towards equality (even in these "harmless" examples). Equality of treatment which is far from being achieved.

(a copy of the messy comment above)

A collection of verses from the Qur'an about unbelievers

A person's beliefs about life (and afterlife) have a huge effect on how they live and perceive the value of other people's lives; it is nothing like blaming school shootings on violent video games, unless you assume that the shooters actually believed they lived inside a videogame.

The Qur'an, Islam's founding text, makes it quite clear that
a) The unbeliever will burn in hellfire forever (e.g. 4:56)
(nothing new here, M's recycling the holy texts already in existence)
and b) the unbeliever must be killed if he does not accept Islam (4:89), either by God or "or at our hands" (9:52); only Islam can exist on earth (2:193).
See this article on the history of Jihad and martyrdom in Islam.

Of course, the majority of muslims, like any other group of human beings, aspire to live their peaceful lives, etc. The difference between Islam and Christianity or Judaism, apart from its youth, is that it is founded upon a character and his book that are highly impervious to the effects of secularization. While the Bible is an edited compilation of transcripts written by several authors over centuries, the Qur'an was written by one warrior general in the space of his lifetime; questioning any part of the book's infallibility puts the whole faith in question, a risky thing when you read what the book in question has to say about non-believers. (I could go on, but really, Harris says it so much better than me in "The End of Faith" ...for free!).

But you want evidence, so here are a few things to ponder, in relation to what the Qur'an, and thus Islam, has to say about the topics in question. (Keeping in mind that Mohamed did not invent the barbarities that the book contains; they were contemporaneous, he simply enshrined them as the "infallible" word of God. Also: Mohamed's life, as transcribed in the Hadith, is considered a role model).

Honour killing: women considered property of men (see s.4:34) http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0212_020212_hon
orkilling_2.html
Honour killing: adulterers should be killed anyway, no?
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/07/24/2003180222

Because of sharia law's stance on adultery, it remains a crime in several Islamic countries
(sharia law is for the most part copied from the Torah/OT; in Islam, adultery is one of the worst sins/crimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zina_(Arabic) ):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery#Criminal_penalties

Also, denouncing rape can get you jailed... for adultery:
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=7943698

homosexuality: illegal in 75/195 countries; 32/48 Muslim countries. In 8 countries it is punishable by death... under sharia law, of course (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, UAE, Sudan, Nigeria, la Mauritania and Somalia).

Condoning slavery: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_slavery#Slavery_
in_the_contemporary_Muslim_world

forced marriage of minors: what Islamic doctrine/scholars say: http://muslim-quotes.netfirms.com/childbrides.html
women protest age limit laws: http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=88589
more statistics on child brides (once again, the problem did not stem from Islam, but is upheld by it... Mo+Aisha): http://marriage.about.com/od/arrangedmarriages/a/childbride.htm

Apostasy and human rights: http://www.iheu.org/node/1541

Of the 126 designated terrorist organisations, 73 (60%) are religious, 65 (51%) are Islamic extremists. To compare, the second highest ranking terrorist-fueling ideology, communism, has only 21 (17%) groups. Jihad anyone?

Government report on link between Koranic schools and terrorism: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21654.pdf

Of the 17 "Significant Ongoing Armed Conflicts of 2010", only 5 are not marked by religious ideologies (only 2 if communism is counted as a religious ideology). Eleven of these conflicts involve Islamists, who are either trying to instate an Islamic theocracy (in accordance with the teachings of the Qur'an), or they are fighting Muslim governments that are considered not "Muslim" enough.

A collection of verses from the Qur'an about unbelievers

A person's beliefs about life (and afterlife) have a huge effect on how they live and perceive the value of other people's lives; it is nothing like blaming school shootings on violent video games, unless you assume that the shooters actually believed they lived inside a videogame.

The Qur'an, Islam's founding text, makes it quite clear that
a) The unbeliever will burn in hellfire forever (e.g. 4:56)
(nothing new here, M's recycling the holy texts already in existence)
and b) the unbeliever must be killed if he does not accept Islam (4:89), either by God or "or at our hands" (9:52); only Islam can exist on earth (2:193).
See this article on the history of Jihad and martyrdom in Islam.

Of course, the majority of muslims, like any other group of human beings, aspire to live their peaceful lives, etc. The difference between Islam and Christianity or Judaism, apart from its youth, is that it is founded upon a character and his book that are highly impervious to the effects of secularization. While the Bible is an edited compilation of transcripts written by several authors over centuries, the Qur'an was written by one warrior general in the space of his lifetime; questioning any part of the book's infallibility puts the whole faith in question, a risky thing when you read what the book in question has to say about non-believers. (I could go on, but really, Harris says it so much better than me in "The End of Faith" ...for free!).

But you want evidence, so here are a few things to ponder, in relation to what the Qur'an, and thus Islam, has to say about the topics in question. (Keeping in mind that Mohamed did not invent the barbarities that the book contains; they were contemporaneous, he simply enshrined them as the "infallible" word of God. Also: Mohamed's life, as transcribed in the Hadith, is considered a role model).

Honour killing: women considered property of men (see s.4:34) http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/02/0212_020212_honorkilling_2.html
Honour killing: adulterers should be killed anyway, no?
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/07/24/2003180222

Because of sharia law's stance on adultery, it remains a crime in several Islamic countries
(sharia law is for the most part copied from the Torah/OT; in Islam, adultery is one of the worst sins/crimes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zina_(Arabic) ):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adultery#Criminal_penalties

Also, denouncing rape can get you jailed... for adultery:
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=7943698

homosexuality: illegal in 75/195 countries; 32/48 Muslim countries. In 8 countries it is punishable by death... under sharia law, of course (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, UAE, Sudan, Nigeria, la Mauritania and Somalia).

Condoning slavery: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_slavery#Slavery_in_the_contemporary_Muslim_world

forced marriage of minors: what Islamic doctrine/scholars say: http://muslim-quotes.netfirms.com/childbrides.html
women protest age limit laws: http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=88589
more statistics on child brides (once again, the problem did not stem from Islam, but is upheld by it... Mo+Aisha): http://marriage.about.com/od/arrangedmarriages/a/childbride.htm

Apostasy and human rights: http://www.iheu.org/node/1541

Of the 126 designated terrorist organisations, 73 (60%) are religious, 65 (51%) are Islamic extremists. To compare, the second highest ranking terrorist-fueling ideology, communism, has only 21 (17%) groups. Jihad anyone?

Government report on link between Koranic schools and terrorism: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21654.pdf

Of the 17 "Significant Ongoing Armed Conflicts of 2010", only 5 are not marked by religious ideologies (only 2 if communism is counted as a religious ideology). Eleven of these conflicts involve Islamists, who are either trying to instate an Islamic theocracy (in accordance with the teachings of the Qur'an), or they are fighting Muslim governments that are considered not "Muslim" enough.

edit: html's not working, so this looks like crap. sorry, i'm too tired to rearrange right now.


>> ^SDGundamX:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/hpqp" title="member since July 25th, 2009" class="profilelink">hpqp
You repeated his speaking points and provided no evidence to support them and then insinuated that I know nothing of Islam's teachings to boot. You've clearly learned from your teachers (Dawkins, Harris, and Hitchens) quite well.
Show me some evidence please that shows that Islamic followers are more likely to cause harm to fellow human beings than others. By evidence I mean an empirical study that controls for other factors that include but are not limited to: education, income, regional cultural factors (other than religion), and local political systems (or lack thereof as the case may be, for example in countries such as Somalia).
And no, you didn't correct that for me. It doesn't matter their stated reasons for committing the violence. People who resort to violence do so for a complex array of reasons. I dispute the notion that people commit violence soley "because of their religion" any more than school shootings occur "because kids play violent video games."

>> ^joedirt:

What ignorance...
You can look from a modern perspective about what is morally appropriate age of consent but you are a fucking absolute idiot if you pretend that 18 years is ok, and say 13 isn't. It all depends on historical context. You have to look at the society at the time.
Go back to Jesus's time. How old was Mary? What was age of marriage in Moses day? How about what would be ok in the US in 1910? What about in the 50s? Hate to tell you this, but for probably hundreds of millions of years, when a female reaches puberty that is when they begin to copulate.
You are fucking idiot if you think it's wrong to breed dogs that under the age of 5 but somehow humans are so different. It's all cultural morals and depends on the society. Do you know what was "normal" in the 700s before you start throwing around kiddie fucker.
You do realize your own great great grandfather was probably also a kiddie fucker, ever think about that?

Everyone should know that BicycleRepairMan is descended from a long line of "kiddie fiddlers"!!!

Ignorance? Historical context? You're kidding right? Shariah permits child brides. Shariah is followed today. Prepubescent children are being married off right now.
If you really think this is ok because it was culturally acceptable historically speaking, then you sir, are full of shit.

I love when people associate gay marriage, a union joined by two consenting adults to things like bestiality and pedophilia. Both of those acts occur between a party that is incapable of making a consented decision. That is a huge freaking difference.

Also, in fairness, I think polygamy should be legal. There's no reason more than 2 adults can't consent to a union. However polygamy has a long history of arranged marriages and child brides, which is just a nice way of saying pedophilia. So on those grounds, I understand why polygamy is illegal.

>> ^quantumushroom:
As archaic (or not, since there are still child brides in some Muslim countries) as arranged marriages were/are for power , they were still between a man and a woman (or women).

No, these were arrangements between two men, a father and a husband, concerning a piece of property, a bride. Women were not legal persons, and could not enter into such a contract in most cases. The fact that the husband has sex with the property exchanged does not change who entered into the contract, two men.

Even societies that either were indifferent to homosexuality or--in the weakest form of approval--looked the other way, never condoned gay marriage.

Nobody wanted "gay marriage" by the old definition, since the bride is property, no such analog was desirable. Marriage has been redefined, very recently, to be a contract between legal persons which confers benefits. The folks who are complaining about "redefinition" have benefited from their redefinition, and now they want to set it in stone, and pretend it has always been that way.

If they could provide any evidence that this redefinition is more socially destructive than the redefinition they have been using, let them state their case. The fact that the creator of the video don't seem to have an argument beyond "redefinition conspiracy", and seems to be completely ignorant of the historical context, does not speak well for the position.

I'll not mention the Scamulus and our new communist PresiTeleprompter's endless Unconstitutional power grabs in unrelated threads if select left-wringers here will stop desperately referencing Black people and slavery to somehow make a point about gay marriage. Remember, it was Blacks as a voting bloc who helped vote down legalized gay marriage in Commiefornia, resulting in many, many uses of the N-word over at Daily Komatose and other liberal web meccas.

A property arrangement in which a father sells his daughter to an unrelated man in exchange for the social gain associated with the familial connection, and dependent on the culture and status of those involved, sometimes including other property such as a dowry or a bride price.

As archaic (or not, since there are still child brides in some Muslim countries) as arranged marriages were/are for power , they were still between a man and a woman (or women). Even societies that either were indifferent to homosexuality or--in the weakest form of approval--looked the other way, never condoned gay marriage.

Men and women are not interchangeable, there are real differences between the sexes.

And for the trendy religion-bashers, Christianity has given more good to the world than it has taken, and done far less evil than communism, socialism and fascism.