BF2S Forums Grat news! Germany finally goes against its own laws in favor of Islam

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Bullshit lowing, just BULL SHIT.

How the hell is allowing someone to practice their religion freely, appeasing the terrorists?

In fact it's the opposite to appeasement - if the terrorists are saying "everyone should be a muslim" - we are saying "everyone should have the freedom to practice whatever religion they wish".

Actually, what is BULLSHIT is you posting saying I insinuated that "allowing someone to practice their religion freely, appeasing the terrorists".

I defy you to post where I said that.

I also think it is funny that you mention "terrorists". IN FACT I think, YOU are the first person in this thread to make the connection or mention terrorism and religion in the same sentence. Imagine that. Which religion did you have in mind by the way?

I define those sections of the Islamic world that wish to see us all adopting the Islam faith and laws as terrorists.

And, if you're not talking about those people, then what the fuck are you talking about?

Oh, and I'm talking about all religions.

CameronPoe wrote:

lowing wrote:

This is an attack by 100% of the Arab/Islamic countries in the UN ( oops the majority I am guessing) to curtail free speach and expression. All of this coming from your beloved tolerant Islamic nations. It is indefensable, no wonder you say "so what". Because you can not maintain your argument about these countries and their religion and defend this action.

Curtail free speech and expression .... in Islamic countries. Phew. I thought for a second that one of your irrational fears was going to have an impact on my life or on global politics.... /wipes sweat from brow

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Actually, what is BULLSHIT is you posting saying I insinuated that "allowing someone to practice their religion freely, appeasing the terrorists".

I defy you to post where I said that.

I also think it is funny that you mention "terrorists". IN FACT I think, YOU are the first person in this thread to make the connection or mention terrorism and religion in the same sentence. Imagine that. Which religion did you have in mind by the way?

I define those sections of the Islamic world that wish to see us all adopting the Islam faith and laws as terrorists.

And, if you're not talking about those people, then what the fuck are you talking about?

Oh, and I'm talking about all religions.

http://islamworld.net/docs/justice.html


http://www.youngmuslims.ca/online_libra … ll_muslims


well you got a problem becausr these links were from sites off of google that braddock said were "pro-Islam". So I dunno what to tell ya, but I am assuming all who believe in this are terrorists based on your opinion. I do gather that since this is a "pro_Islam" site that more than just a small minority believe in this.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

I define those sections of the Islamic world that wish to see us all adopting the Islam faith and laws as terrorists.

And, if you're not talking about those people, then what the fuck are you talking about?

Oh, and I'm talking about all religions.

http://islamworld.net/docs/justice.html


http://www.youngmuslims.ca/online_libra … ll_muslims


well you got a problem becausr these links were from sites off of google that braddock said were "pro-Islam". So I dunno what to tell ya, but I am assuming all who believe in this are terrorists based on your opinion. I do gather that since this is a "pro_Islam" site that more than just a small minority believe in this.

OK, let me rephrase what I said, to make myself clearer:

I define those sections of the Islamic world that wish to force Islamic faith and laws on the entire world as terrorists.

Spark wrote:

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

I define those sections of the Islamic world that wish to see us all adopting the Islam faith and laws as terrorists.

And, if you're not talking about those people, then what the fuck are you talking about?

Oh, and I'm talking about all religions.

http://islamworld.net/docs/justice.html


http://www.youngmuslims.ca/online_libra … ll_muslims


well you got a problem becausr these links were from sites off of google that braddock said were "pro-Islam". So I dunno what to tell ya, but I am assuming all who believe in this are terrorists based on your opinion. I do gather that since this is a "pro_Islam" site that more than just a small minority believe in this.

By that logic, Mormons, 7th Day Adventists, and the like are also terrorists. No one believes that, come on now.

Spark wrote:

Jihad = struggle.

In that sense there are a lot of things that could be defined as 'struggle'. Teaching people that Islam is a much more moderate religion than they think is a 'jihad'. There is also (according to the local Muslim community leader anyway), an eternal internal 'jihad' against evil/sin.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

OK, let me rephrase what I said, to make myself clearer:

I define those sections of the Islamic world that wish to force Islamic faith and laws on the entire world as terrorists.

Well then if you are talking about people who do not give a shit what anyone else does,, or believes, then you are not talking about Islam, because it is CLEAR even on the "pro_Islam" sites that Islam CLEARLY must overcome these non-believers. It is the DUTY of EVERY MUSLIM to JIHAD!!. That is from one of Braddocks's   PRO-ISLAM sites. So again your opinion and Islamic facts and beliefs are in conflict.

It is also the duty of every Christian to spread the Christian message.

Last edited by lowing (2008-04-05 21:08:46)

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

It is also the duty of every Christian to spread the Christian message.

If you want to compare Christianity and Islam we can do so, do you wanna start with each religions messengers of God, their words, their actions, or their teachings??

If we had both Christian extremists going around killing people as well as Islamic ones then there would be some point to that, however we don't.

But, and here's the key point - that doesn't make one of those faiths violent and the other not, individual people are violent, not systems of faith.

Again,

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/6374 … lesnt3.png

how many colours?

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

If we had both Christian extremists going around killing people as well as Islamic ones then there would be some point to that, however we don't.

But, and here's the key point - that doesn't make one of those faiths violent and the other not, individual people are violent, not systems of faith.

Again,

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/6374 … lesnt3.png

how many colours?

Coupla things.

First, "IF" we had Christian extremists.................nothing more needs to be said.

I am not talking about extremism. I am talking about 100% of the Arab Islamic nations in the UN passing a resolution to "police the media and individuals from free speech.  THis is not the extremists doing this. THis is your beloved everyday Islamic faith.

Make your mind up!

I thought this thread was about how a decision to allow Muslims to practice their faith whilst at school is appeasing them and just one step closer to the Islamisation of the entire world.

Try to keep on topic, it is your topic after all.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Make your mind up!

I thought this thread was about how a decision to allow Muslims to practice their faith whilst at school is appeasing them and just one step closer to the Islamisation of the entire world.

Try to keep on topic, it is your topic after all.

Then why are you mentioning Christianity? That religion is not part of the OP. As always the OP strayed. I posted other links to challenge responses.

If you wanna talk about the OP we can do so, I have made my point about it, when will you address it?

I have. Allowing people to practice their religion freely is in no way "appeasement" and allowing them space to pray is precisely "religious neutrality".

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

lowing wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

I have. Allowing people to practice their religion freely is in no way "appeasement" and allowing them space to pray is precisely "religious neutrality".

Ummmm no, this goes against the current laws and change is sought to appease a special interest group. In this case, yet again, it is Islam. A very needy and attention starved religion it seems

It does not go against German Basic Law according to the Judge, and he should know.

the article you linked to wrote:

The judge, however, cited German Basic Law, which allows for freedom of religion. This basic right doesn't only apply to internal freedom, but to external freedom, the justice decided. This includes the freedom to pray, including Muslim prayer.

Or did you not read past the headline, again?

OP's website wrote:

According to the court, the Muslim student sought the ruling because his religion requires him to pray five times a day at specific times. Yet the school had not allowed him to pray, citing its constitutional neutrality law, which stops the state from identifying with any given religion in a public institution.

B.Schuss wrote:

care to explain what law of the land was changed ? the court had to balance freedom of religion and separation of church and state, both important parts of the constitution here in germany. The court made a ruling on the immediate case ( which I am totally satisfied with, btw ), and a higher court will make a ruling on the overall issue within a year.

As long as those are not part of the school activities, it is every student's right to practice their religion freely. The school doesn't chose any religion over another, but will provide a neutral room for everyone to pray in, at times when school activities are not disrupted, i.e. during lunch breaks or whatever is appropriate.

From my point of view, that is a very good compromise, until a higher court makes a ruling.

lowing wrote:

none yet, but we will see won't we?

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Morpheus1229 wrote:

Just because it happened to be a muslim that asked for a "quiet room"?

lowing, kicking up a fuss just because something is even vaguely connected to Muslims/Islam in some way???

No! He wouldn't do that!

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

(yes, for the heard of thinking, that was another example of what we brits like to call 'sarcasm')