Originally Posted by bruno

Im not suggesting Muslim countries dont have war or conflict, Im merely demonstrating how Christian countries have a tendancy to be violent as well.




Actually Erwin Johannes Eugen Rommel is a German born and raised. He lead the German army into North Africa, again instigated by Germans not Muslims. And Thomas Edward Lawrence was a british soldier born in North Wales to an Anglo-Irish father. Infact he was educated at Jesus College, Oxford. But I do admit Muslim countries were involved but only to a limited extent. Again Im not implying Islam is better or less violent, than Christianity, but that the opposite isnt true either.




Now I never stated Ottamans have problems invading people or that they are a benevolent culture. Im just noting how Christian countries (regardless or reason or justification) do the same actions they condemn Islam of doing.





That is true, and I retract the comment about modern slavery being started by Christians, because thats irrelevant since almost every great civilization has had a flourishing slave trade. I apologize for singling out Christianity.




Only the first Crusade was started because of that reason. And note that after they regained the territories they took it a step further and sieged Jerusalem then ''massacred the civilians, destroyed mosques and pillaged the city.'' The second crusade was instigated by preachers calling for the down fall of Islam. The third crusade was started by pope Gregory VIII. The forth was started by pope Innocent III and so on. All may not have been instigated by Christians, but to ignore the fact that Christians do have a historical tendancy to be as aggressive as Islam seems naive. Ive done a thesis on the Crusades and believe me their both as guilty, so your attempt to make it seem that the Christians did it in defence falls short.



So because you can name 20 Islamic counterparts that means my arguement doesnt have merit? It seems to me your ignoring my arguement completely. Im not trying so say Christianity is evil or that Islam is being bullied, but that Christianity and Islam are two sides of a coin. I just noted a few things that demonstrate how Christianity isnt THAT different than Islam. So to single out Islam as a religion that needs to be destroyed has absolutely no historical or intellectual justification.

P.S. I appreciate you trying to take my arguement apart its healthy to question once believes.

Originally Posted by Bobcat1

I agree in principle with your entire post, with one exception. Unlike other religions, the philosophy of Islam is antithetical to our Western values of freedom of speech and religion, and the equality of sex, race and creed.

Originally Posted by Bobcat1

I agree in principle with your entire post, with one exception. Unlike other religions, the philosophy of Islam is antithetical to our Western values of freedom of speech and religion, and the equality of sex, race and creed.

Originally Posted by Lostprod

When the 1st crusade ended it was the Muslims who allowed Jews and Christians to enter Jerusalem to worship. Thats seems pretty tolerable of other religions to me

Originally Posted by bruno

That’s arguable.. The other day in bangkok I walked into a Muslim street (90% of people there are Muslim) to get some arab food, and a Christian man stood in the middle preaching the ”sins” of the Muslims and demanding them to convert. Nothing happened nobody converted and the man left peacefully after an hour or so. Now this has nothing to do with the Christian man, because hes a minority to how Christians conduct themselves. But Im just showing you how the Muslim community demonstrates the religious tolerance and respect of free speech exhibited by moderate Muslims everywhere.