Or *gasp* she could have actually had the baby. What a concept eh?

After which she says, "All the while, I was thinking that if religion hadn't been allowed to seep into American politics the way it has, I wouldn't even be there.

This is a true statement. If it weren't for religion, there would not have been a founding of this country, therefore, she would never have been born herself. Not only would she have not been there, she would not have been anywhere.

Thanks for posting this. I read this article in the paper this morning. It's on the top of the front page of the Outlook section, which is Section B in the Sunday Washington Post. It was given very prominent placement.

Don't forget that she's chatting Monday at noon, here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/06/02/DI2006060200911.html

If you do post a question, PLEASE don't get irrational and call her a baby-killer. That makes all of us look bad. But I'd love it if she had hundreds of well reasoned posts and questions to read through.

Wih everything else going to pot, it seems the Bushians are eager to turn back to these anti-choice, anti-gay diversions.

Why the sudden dearth of "Iraq is a stable and commercially bustling democracy that is no more dangerous than your typical American city" stories?

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth:

Baghdad Morgue Reports Record Figures for May
Nearly 1,400 bodies were brought to the facility, the highest number since the war began.
By Louise Roug, LA Times Staff Writer
June 4, 2006

BAGHDAD — New Iraqi government documents show that, excluding the nearly daily bombings, more Baghdad residents died in shootings, stabbings and other violence in May than in any other month since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.

The numbers, and accounts from residents, depict neighborhoods descending further into violence and fear.

Last month, 1,398 bodies were brought to the central morgue, according to Ministry of Health statistics, 307 more than in April. The count doesn't include soldiers or civilian victims of explosions, on whom autopsies are not usually conducted.

Since 2003, at least 30,240 bodies have been brought to the morgue, the vast majority of them victims of gunmen who are not caught. Bodies often lie in the streets for hours.

In response, many Iraqis are closing their shops, drawing their blinds and staying home, turning once-vibrant neighborhoods into ghost towns.

Residents in some areas fear death squads and Shiite-dominated security forces. In other parts of town, they worry about religious extremists who have threatened to kill men who wear shorts and women who drive or leave their hair uncovered.

"I feel like I'm living in a prison," said Sahar Mohammed, 24, a Sunni Arab resident of west Baghdad who recently put her car in the garage and exchanged trousers for more conservative skirts. "I'm afraid of the people in my neighborhood. You don't know how people around you think nowadays."

A few days ago, violence literally came to the doorstep of Dina Ahmed, who lives in the Amiriya district. Outside her house, gunmen killed two people and stole their car. Her family tried to wash away the blood, but the sidewalk is still stained, she said.

Ahmed, 24, comes from a secular Kurdish family but covers herself with the hijab to protect herself when she goes to and from work.

In the same neighborhood, Lamya Salman, a 59-year-old Sunni, gave up driving after one of her sons brought home a leaflet he had found in the street.

"All of these things are prohibited or you will face death," the note said, listing women driving and going out with uncovered hair. The pamphlet also listed the wearing of T-shirts, shorts, jeans, gold chains and goatees.

"We were horrified," said Salman, whose neighborhood was once a safe, upper-middle class area. Despite battles and chaos, Salman and her family are staying for a simple reason.

"We have nowhere to go," she said.

Since the swearing-in of the new Iraqi government, politicians have demanded higher salaries and beefed-up security details for themselves but have failed to agree on candidates for key security posts. Prime Minister Nouri Maliki has pledged to nominate the defense and interior ministers today.

Meanwhile, authorities reported that at least 61 people were killed or found dead Saturday as violence swept the country, touching men and women, Christians and Kurds, Sunni Arabs and Shiites.

Gunmen killed a Russian Embassy official and abducted four others in a daylight attack in the upscale Mansour neighborhood in Baghdad, Iraqi and Russian authorities said. In Moscow, the Russian Foreign Ministry set up a crisis center to coordinate efforts to win the release of the kidnapped diplomats.

Russia opposed the U.S.-led invasion and has not contributed any troops to the coalition effort in Iraq.

In Basra, a suicide bomber killed 32 people and wounded 77, officials said. The explosives tore through a crowded market where people were shopping for bicycles and cellphones around dusk. A Christian man was gunned down in a separate incident; a day earlier, a Muslim cleric was killed in the city.

On Wednesday, Maliki had declared a state of emergency in the Shiite-dominated southern city, which has become increasingly volatile.

In Baqubah, a mixed city north of the capital, residents found seven heads in two banana crates. One more head, that of a Sunni cleric, was perched on top of the boxes, wrapped in plastic and paper as if it were a gift.

"This is the fate of every traitor," said a note scribbled on the paper. "Hell will be his final destination." The note said the man had killed four Shiite doctors and was slain in retaliation.

Police believe the other heads were of cousins, Sunnis who worked together driving trucks. A relative said the men were kidnapped en masse weeks ago as they drove to a Baghdad hospital to donate blood for an injured relative. Authorities have yet to find the eight bodies.

Also in Baqubah, rebels armed with machine guns and grenade launchers attacked a police checkpoint, killing six officers and a civilian and injuring five people. In a separate incident, four Shiite mechanics were slain by gunmen.

In Baghdad, police officers and U.S. soldiers recovered at least 22 bodies that had been burned, blindfolded, handcuffed, thrown into a river or dumped near a pediatric hospital.

A roadside bomb hit an ambulance in Baghdad, killing a pregnant woman and injuring the driver. Gunmen fired at another ambulance, killing the driver and injuring a medic. Two other roadside bombs injured six police officers.

In the northern city of Kirkuk, a Kurdish politician was assassinated.

Times staff writers Saif Rasheed, Shamil Aziz and Suhail Ahmad in Baghdad

Gee, I wonder if Dana L.'s mother ever considered aborting her....

She is right about the unfairness of the pill's availability. However, she is wrong about the abortion.

I hate to side with the Right on anything, especially an issue as contentious as abortion, but abortion is an abomination. As is the death penalty. As is (most of the time) war.

Women are entitled to a "choice" - a very fine one called putting the child up for adoption. I ask my fellow Liberals: what's wrong with that?

Aarontime, we can always count on you to rejoice whenever bad news rears its ugly head. Why do you hate America so much? Why do you stand with the terrorists? Who are you? Are you one of them? Or are you just another moron? I'm betting on the latter. You're morontime from here on out. Later, Morontime...

Standard liberal debating tactic #17: when absolutely all else fails, desperately try to change the subject.

What in the hell ever happened to the concept of PERSONAL responsiblity? It is obviously is completely foreign to Dana L. as it is to most liberals.

What in the hell ever happened to the concept of PERSONAAL responsiblity?

Gee, maybe you should ask Chimpy McFlightsuit and the entire Rethuglican Party the same question, eh? Just a thought.

That should be PERSONAL with one A. Sorry.

Oh, The TAL strikes again. A floppy limp-wristed strike, to be sure, but a valiant effort from our adolescent side.

This, you see, is what passes for literate and intellectual political discourse on the Left, even in babyland Left. The thread is about a selfish woman who decided to have unprotected sex and then use killing the unborn baby as a method of birth control, while somehow managing to dodge any personal responsibility for the act and blaming it on the Republican Party.

And TAL uses it as chance to bring up the chimpy thing again, as well as the flightsuit thing again. Too bad he is too ignorant to know that anyone flying in a supersonic fighter is required to wear a pressurized flight suit. Mandatory, doncha know. Has to. No option.

Sure, he could have landed granny-style in a helicopter, the way Bill did 28 times during his presidency. But he loved flying fighters, preferred to land in a fighter, and wore what he had to wear to do that.

You guys are so pro-choice, TAL, how could you deny the Prez his choice of transportation?

"Baghdad Morgue Reports Record Figures for May
Nearly 1,400 bodies were brought to the facility, the highest number since the war began." Posted by: Aarontime

Yeah. Muslims slaughtering Muslims day in, day out. The "religion of peace" in action.

On topic, personal responsibility seems to be an out-dated concept, at least for liberals.

Hey guys, quick question.

Lets say all your dreams come true, the streets become paved with bibles and rapture becomes imminent.

1. Do you advocate jailing women who have abortions?

2. If so, then are you going to fund a group of roving gynocologists to perform exams upon the mere accusation of an abortion?

3. What about that sticky little idea of aborting an otherwise healthy fetus for the mother's health, or instances of rape and incest, since thats pretty squishy morals if you would kill one life to save another, whos life exactly is more important, and why?

4. Since the baby willhave all human rights, does a mother not breast-feeding or taking pre-natal vitamins qualify as child-abuse, can we send them to jail, or have the same group of Gyno./ObGyns checking up on EVERY birth in the nation, and do you think you could keep up with the price of testinf for those things upon an accusation by someone else?

5. Can you stop a woman from boarding a plane if shes been accused of going overseas to have an abortion, can you arrest her upon arrival back in the US?

just wonderin, y'know reality check kinda things, id love to hear some answers to these.

LOL, sorry guys, totally goofed up on the breast-feeding thing, my bad.

lets replace that with something silly, like smoking during pregnancy...you ever seen a pregnant woman having a "nick-fit"

Third Eye Open, you forgot to ask if any of us have stopped beating our wives. But just to play along:

#1. No.

#2. N/A, see answer #1

#3. I don't believe that abortion should be performed except to save the life of the mother. However, the political reality is that abortion will probably never be made illegal in the case of rape or incest. "Women's health" has been so broadly defined over the years as to be meaningless.

#4. If smoking after your child is born and failing to give your child the proper vitamins are not child abuse, it stands to reason that they would not be child abuse for an unborn child, either. As for the "jailing" issue, see answer #1.

#5. No. As for the "arrest" issue, see answer #1.

"just wonderin, y'know reality check kinda things, id love to hear some answers to these."

Yes, the first paragraph of your comment and the tone of your questions clearly demonstrates how interested you are in actual dialogue. :rolleyes:

What kind of "reality" check was that? That's like saying if we outlaw guns, are we going to put cameras in everyones house, have roaming police officers ripping up someones house upon the accusation of a firearm being in possession, stop someone from boarding a plane if they're being accused of going overseas to get a firearm?

What kind of reality are you living in? Liberal reality?

I'd also like to point out another thing few liberals know of: compassion. People have this argument of, ohh ohh save the mothers life, no no save the babies life right? Well something struck me a couple of days ago. Do we all ever think about how incredible good parents are? Have you ever noticed that good parents will gladly and without question throw their own lives away in order to save or even simply better their own child's life? Such devotion is so amazing yet here we are, a nation nearly in agreeance that the life of the mother is far more important all things being equal. I always find it a bit curious. Not that im saying good parents should be a reason to ban any and all abortions (which i find unrealistic and undemocratic no matter how moral it might be), its just a thought that struck me...

So much for "doing it for the children" Eh? Why the hell didn't her man put on a damn condom if she didn't want one in the oven? Liberals are are dying a breed in more ways than one.

They actually kill their young.

This is news?

Oh it's just a living section story.

Honestly why was this even written up except to be an inditement on the Bush Administration? Doesn't the FDA review drugs all the time and sometimes several times before allowing them to be over the counter?

I'm actually all for "Plan B" but I'm also for Plan A in the sense of doing one's best to control your own body. If that means having a Vasectamy or putting in a diaphram or what have you so be it.

Will and Jonathan,

YOU may think they are silly questions but the crux of the problem is enforcement. You can make anything illegal, and obviously you aren't gonna stop people from doing them, by banning abortion, you are just opening back up the blackmarket for them. So again, if you havea law you can't enforce, then whats the point in making them illegal, all you've done is won some sort of moral battle that disenfranchises the other portion of the country that disagrees with you, and have accomplished nothing.

Will,

by the way, just because you dont like my tongue-in-cheek comments doesn't mean you occupy some sort of rhetorical highground, it just means that you underestimate your adversary, which is why conservatives always lose in the end.

and by the way, HAVE you stopped beating your wife yet?

What in the hell ever happened to the concept of PERSONAL responsiblity? It is obviously is completely foreign to Dana L. as it is to most liberals.

-- I haven't seen any Republicans taking ANY responsibility for anything in the past five years, so you should talk.

"and by the way, HAVE you stopped beating your wife yet?" Posted by: Third Eye Open

That's a question you should ask Muslim men.

(Qur'an 4:34) Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, & because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them & banish them to beds apart; and beat them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted, Great.

Islam, Middle East and Fascism

"You can make anything illegal, and obviously you aren't gonna stop people from doing them, by banning abortion, you are just opening back up the blackmarket for them." 3 eyes

So...what's the point of having any laws at all? Let's just let everyone decide for themselves what's right. Afterall, accoring to you they can't be stopped anyway, and laws just create blackmarkets. So if nothing is illegal no one will break the law. Brilliant logic I must say.

Who is this 3 eyes, so wise in the ways of law and reason?

Freedom1,

well the Bible tells us to beat our children, so are the christinas of this nation a better people?

"Withhold not chastisement from a boy; if you beat him with a rod he will not die. Beat him with the rod, and you will save him from the nether world." (Proverbs 23:13-14 NAB)

That's a child. Children need to be disciplined.

Since when have you favored domestic abuse of women?

Phnxbmed,

You're a little special, arent'cha?

my point is that if you cant enforce a law, whats the point, we have laws that are enforceable, such as a law against murder, because we can fairly easily provide proof that a crime has occured. Now we can prove a crime such as smoking pot has occured too, using tests, my point is are you advocating that we design a system of roving gynecologists employed by the government to come give your wife an exam on your couch because a friend of hers accused her having an abortion?

If you have a set of laws which you wont enforce by throwing girls in jail or making them submit to uteral testing at the will of the state, then ewhat did you win, a moral victory, is that what you guys want, you wanna have someone tell you that you've won?

lets skip the formalities, YOU WON!

freedom1,

so you cant abuse your wife with a lead pipe, but you can abuse your kids with it?

Would you idiot moonbats please learn to write? It's not that hard to use proper punctuation, yet most of you trolls refuse to do so.

It's not enough that you have to be wrong all the time; your writing has to suck too, so you can really get on my nerves. Now shape up, kooks!

Keefer,

I love when you get all antsy and don't say anything. We still on for anal sex and pizza tonight?

Disciplining children is not abuse. They are children. Beating adult women is abuse. Your support of beating women is disgusting, Third Eye Open. No wonder liberals support Islam.

Gee, maybe you should ask Chimpy McFlightsuit and the entire Rethuglican Party the same question, eh? Just a thought.

Gee, maybe we should ask teenage zitsqueezer's momma why she wasn't more responsible when she had the chance. If she'd have known what she was getting, she'd have aborted teenage when she had the chance...

[i]"By the way, just because you dont like my tongue-in-cheek comments doesn't mean you occupy some sort of rhetorical highground, it just means that you underestimate your adversary, which is why conservatives always lose in the end."[/i]

Actually, I've found that the most formidable adversaries are the ones who can debate topics without resorting to inflammatory dialogue, pointless asides, or snark. Their ideas and opinions speak for themselves. Yours, obviously, do not.

And if conservatives "always lose in the end," how is it that we keep winning elections?

[i]"YOU may think they are silly questions but the crux of the problem is enforcement. You can make anything illegal, and obviously you aren't gonna stop people from doing them, by banning abortion, you are just opening back up the blackmarket for them. So again, if you havea law you can't enforce, then whats the point in making them illegal, all you've done is won some sort of moral battle that disenfranchises the other portion of the country that disagrees with you, and have accomplished nothing."[/i]

First, they are silly questions because nobody is advocating jailing of women who have abortions, yet the focus of all but one of your questions was exactly that. Second, regardless of the silliness of your questions, I did answer them. Third, you claim that the thrust of your questions was to demonstrate how enforcement is impossible, yet you do so by setting up the straw man of going after women who have had abortions and completely ignore how such a policy could be enforced: namely going after the doctors who perform abortions. Obviously that would not stop all illegal abortions from taking place, but no law enforcement measure is 100% effective.

"and by the way, HAVE you stopped beating your wife yet?"

As I've never been married, that would be difficult.

Keefer,

"The best part of you ran down the crack of your momma's ass and ended up as a brown stain on the matress; I think you've been cheated"

I love that movie

Freedom1,

I dont buy into the bible or the koran, so your argument is what's called, moot!

xoxoxo

Three posts from Third Eye and it still doesn't condemn hitting women. Very telling.

I love how Freedom1 thinks it's okay to beat your children - they need discipline, he says. Wow, I hope you're not a parent yourself. You speak of children as if they are dogs.

Here's a nice little passage for you to chew on:

"If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant, And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; ... Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die."
-- Deuteronomy,Chapter17:2-3,5

Freedom1,

You're making yourself look even more silly than you have already, I won the argument, go back to sleep LOL

Neither Third Eye Open nor maf53 condemns hitting women. Explains a lot.

freedom1,

doesn't have a fully functional brain with which to stop rhetorically beating HIMSELF!

Gee, maybe we should ask teenage zitsqueezer's momma why she wasn't more responsible when she had the chance.

You claim you're 50? That's rubbish my friend. You're nothing but a spoiled thirteen year-old who doesn't have a mature bone in your body. My appologies to whoever raised such a bastard like you for eighteen years.

fyi: I was born alright the first time, but thanks for your concern. F**k you.

Where did I say that, Freedom1?

Don't take him too seriously TEO - he is a man who, on more than one account, has called for the utter destruction of Islam. He openly supports genocide.

I'm surprised he hasn't been banned from the site.

"He openly supports genocide."-maf53

No I don't. I never said that.

I'm surprised that you haven't been banned from this site.

And yes, Islam should be utterly destroyed, the same way nazism, communism and fascism should be utterly destroyed. The War on "Terror" WON'T be won on the battlefield. It will be won when people understand how vile and violent Islam is and they REJECT it.

freedom1,

your hood is slipping.

why don't we just make it a fair trade, we have EVRYONE reject Christianity AND Islam, then it will be a fair trade.

"The War on "Terror" WON'T be won on the battlefield. It will be won when people understand how vile and violent Islam is and they REJECT it."

Well then it's a good thing we invaded and continue to occupy Iraq then, huh? NOW those Muslims will "reject" their own religion, after a bunch of white Christian men on a crusade (Bush's word, not mine) have dropped bombs on their brothers and sisters.

And you wonder why nobody can take you conservatives seriously anymore.

Sorry - I just clicked on this blog to discuss the subject line. But, I see it's been invaded by Rabid Dog Democrats. All the usual wackos. Too bad.

Actually, Kahn, if you had bothered to actually follow the thread, you would see that the subject was changed by your hate-all-things-Islam associate, Freedom1:

"That's a question you should ask Muslim men.

(Qur'an 4:34) Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, & because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them & banish them to beds apart; and beat them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted, Great.

Islam, Middle East and Fascism
Posted by: Freedom1 [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 4, 2006 09:20 PM"

phnxbmed wrote:

"What in the hell ever happened to the concept of PERSONAL responsiblity? It is obviously is completely foreign to Dana L. as it is to most liberals."

Religious-right zealots are taking the concept of personal responsibility away every chance they get, that's what. They're imposing a nanny state where they get to decide for everyone what's right and what's allowed.

Dana L. is willing to take personal responsibility before God for having had an abortion. If God considers her decision unjustified the penalty could be severe.

It's hard to top that for taking personal responsibility.

For your information, phnxbmed, seeking or getting an abortion doesn't make a person a liberal, any more than getting a gun makes a person a conservative.

Presumptions like that reinforce my belief many on the right don't know jack squat about liberals and what they believe. They just go about labeling anyone and anything they don't like, don't agree with or don't understand as liberal.

"Posted by: Third Eye Open at June 4, 2006 10:49 PM"

Racism is an Islamic thing, too.

(Qur’an 9:61) “Gabriel came to Muhammad and said, ‘If a black man comes to you his heart is more gross than a donkey’s.’”

In the "old days" before birth control pills, we use to have oral sex if we didn't want to take a chance on pregnancy. It was GREAT fun. Oh by the way, Dana L is a nutjob.

I'm having a real tough time figuring out which one is younger, teenage liberal or third eye open. It's so confusing because they both act like 16 year olds. Teenage actually curses as an argument however so i think he's probably the 13 year old.

Still waiting, Freedom:

"If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant, And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; ... Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die."
-- Deuteronomy,Chapter17:2-3,5

Jonathan,

thirteen year olds get you excited?

if you don't have a point to make, then so be it, but atleast come up with something a bit more smarmy than, "I think hes 13"

freedom1,

there you go again, actin silly.

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)"

more christians taking slaves.

No I don't. I never said that.

-- Yes, you did Freedom1. You believe that all Islamics should be wiped off the face of the earth

And yes, Islam should be utterly destroyed, the same way nazism, communism and fascism should be utterly destroyed. The War on "Terror" WON'T be won on the battlefield. It will be won when people understand how vile and violent Islam is and they REJECT it.

-- Freedom1, you genocidial freak. I guess you failed to notice that you invaded Afganistan, set up a puppet democracy that turned into an Islamic democracy.

I guess you failed to notice that the Iraqi democracy is an Islamic one as well.

Bush is over there promoting Islam and making it stronger, not weaker, so you have an uphill battle my friend, as no one is on your side.

"Well then it's a good thing we invaded and continue to occupy Iraq then, huh?"-maf53

So deposing the genocidal dictator Saddam Hussein and his Ba'athist regime-who have killed more Muslims than anyone in recent history-is a bad thing in your opinion, maf53?? You're disgusting.

"Still waiting, Freedom:"-maf53

Wait no more, maf53. Jesus Christ's arrival changed everything. He brought a message of "love your neighbor" and "love your enemy". The violence was for a time, but NOT for all time.

If I didn't "love my enemy", then I would have been totally against the Iraq War because Saddam Hussein spent his entire regime raping Muslims, torturing Muslims, cutting off hands of Muslims, cutting off feet of Muslims, cutting out tongues of Muslims, dissecting Muslims and throwing them into vats of acid, ripping the skin off Muslims, and just plain shooting Muslims. I was/am for the Iraq War because this evil perpetrated against Muslims had to stop. The American CHRISTIAN nation stopped it.

"-- Yes, you did Freedom1. You believe that all Islamics should be wiped off the face of the earth." Posted by: axis

Show me where I said that, axis. You can't, because I NEVER said that. I would NEVER say that.

Posted by: Third Eye Open at June 4, 2006 11:20 PM

Slavery is a thing of the past in Christianity. It was Christians who were the driving force in the Abolition movement in the Civil War. Dr. Martin Luther King's Civil Rights movement was based on Christianity's teachings. Don't you know anything, Third Eye?

Islam STILL promotes slavery. Muslims are practicing slavery RIGHT NOW in Africa. Get a clue.

So deposing the genocidal dictator Saddam Hussein and his Ba'athist regime-who have killed more Muslims than anyone in recent history-is a bad thing in your opinion, maf53?? You're disgusting.

-- Actually, Saddam killed 25000 or so. America has killed more than 4 times that many since the war began. Stop the killing of innocents by killing even more innocents. Great plan.

"so you have an uphill battle my friend, as no one is on your side."

Posted by: axis at June 4, 2006 11:27 PM

Of course you would say this, Axis Powers, since you must not get out much. A lot of people around the world have analyzed Islam and see it as violent and evil. Read the comments sections of these websites on topics involving the war/Islam:

Lucianne.com
RightNation.US
littlegreenfootballs.com

Slavery is a thing of the past in Christianity. It was Christians who were the driving force in the Abolition movement in the Civil War. Dr. Martin Luther King's Civil Rights movement was based on Christianity's teachings. Don't you know anything, Third Eye?

Islam STILL promotes slavery. Muslims are practicing slavery RIGHT NOW in Africa. Get a clue.

-- Thats only in America, lots of other Christian dominated societies still adopt it.

But you arguement is flawed, since you are condemning others for doing the exact same thing you did for centuries. A typical hypocrite. You outgrew it, Islam will eventually do the same. Their religious timeline is behind christianity

"-- Actually, Saddam killed 25000 or so." Posted by: axis

Saddam killed about one million Muslims, Axis.

"-- Thats only in America, lots of other Christian dominated societies still adopt it."-Axis Powers

Name one.

"But you arguement is flawed, since you are condemning others for doing the exact same thing you did for centuries. A typical hypocrite."-Axis Powers

Nope. True, Christianity and Islam both practiced slavery. But in Christianity, some things-especially violence and slavery-were for a time, but NOT for all time. God worked through human beings to write the Bible. So what was true for a certain time wasn't true for all time, as change is possible. It's different with Islam, because the Qu'ran was supposedly dictated verbatim by Allah, through Gabriel. No human being can alter the teachings of the Qur'an.The Qur'an teachings were for ALL time, whether the 7th century or the 21st century.

Name one

-- Ok, how about South Africa.

Nope. True, Christianity and Islam both practiced slavery. But in Christianity, some things-especially violence and slavery-were for a time, but NOT for all time.

-- Nonsense. There is no time limits to the slavery passage that third eye quoted as below.
Notice it doesn't say you may purchase slaves until the 20th century. Theres no time limit and its an open ended statement.

"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)"

Axis, your stupidity has no time limit nor expiration date. I already stated that Islam practices slavery in Africa, today. Christianity has long ago denounced slavery. I pity you.

Many parts of Africa are Christian dominated dumb dumb

Maybe add that to your genocidal Islamic hate site you worship

Axis, your BS knows no bounds. This "hate site" just lists Islamic atrocities: thereligionofpeace.com

From the site: "Islamic terrorists have carried out more than 5,092 deadly terror attacks since 9/11."

Stop trying to cover up these Islamic atrocities.

Gee, I wonder if axis is actually a Muslim....

Gee, I wonder if axis is actually a Muslim....

Posted by: Macker

Nah, he's too stupid.

Gee, I wonder if regulars get extra points for going and staying off topic around here.

SO are you saying that if you have EVER done anything wrong you are forever forbidden from changing and finding that same thing wrong when others do it?

Gee, you want to talk about "Simplistic" worldviews. .

It's funny, you hate abortions, but here comes a pill that prevents a fetus from forming, thus preventing the need for abortions, and conservatives oppose it too.

I think that she is stupid for blaming it on Bush per say, but she could definately blame the FDA. An advisory panel says it's ok, and then one person overrules them and says that it isn't. That is somewhat silly.

The best defense against unwanted pregnancies is responsibility however. Either wear a condom, use birth control, or don't have sex, but when a condom breaks, what are you a going to do?

Maf, 3 eyes, and axis,

You all demonstrate your lack of understanding of Christianity, by quoting Liviticus and Dueteronomy. These books contain the MOSAIC LAW, otherwise called the Ceremonial Law. This was given to the Jews prior to the arrival of Christ. And it was nailed to the cross when he gave his life so that you or anyone else might have eternal life. (Its a gift, all you need do is believe, confess your sins and repent). This BTW is your choice, you won't be killed by Christians for not accepting the gift, as you might be by Muslims who are following the Koran. The Ten Commandments are a guide for Christians to live their life, these were not nailed to the cross. Judge Christianity by the message, not the messangers. Judge the Islam also by the message, not the messangers. And the message, as written in th eKoran is one of peace and love ONLY if you are a MUSLIM, its death or subjugation for non Muslims. The message of Christ is Love you neighbor as yourself.

S.W. Anderson,

Getting an abortion may not confirm someone is a liberal but it's a pretty good clue. When they then blame THEIR OWN ACTIONS in taking that life on anyone else, and especially on the liberals most popluar target, President Bush, that's confirmation.

Freedom1,

You're somehow confused that the VAST majority of muslims in this world don't buy into radical, Wahabi islam.

For hundreds of years they kept their nuts quite definately contained in small groups, and noone in the wider muslim world took them very seriously, kinda like a militant version of tongue speakers, or snake handlers, or mormons.
Then after just about 30 years of Saudi Arabia being protected by american forces and getting fat from our petro-dollars, we managed to incubate an entire network of vipers. So don't go thinking this is some unrelated problem that we had no hand in, or that muslims wish your dumb-ass any harm if you aren't dropping white phosphorus on their cities and making naked pyramids so a few sick GI Joe wannabes can fill their scrapbooks. If you dont believe me just go research what cities like baghdad, and Tehran, and Kabul looked like up until the 60's.

Axis,

Where in your post link is slavery linked with Christianity? South Africa is a SECULAR government. To my knowledge the only Christian governement is the Vatican. You really are streaching this beyond credulity. To draw the analogy based on your reasoning, since abortion is legal in the USA, Christians must approve and support abortion because there are Christians in the US. Brilliantly erroneous reasoning.

Please point out one Christian source which today condones or espouses slavery, we are still waiting.

Three Wrote, "hundreds of years they kept their nuts quite definately (sic) contained in small groups, and noone (sic)in the wider muslim (sic) world took them very seriously"
Not true, radical Islam has been around for a thousand years; Google “Mohammedans” and read the bloody history of this cult.

"The purveyors of that death were the Moros, and no book would be large enough to record the history of these Mohammedans who have so smeared the pages of Far Eastern history with blood. No book even remotely concerned with the pacification of the Philippines could ignore the Moros. As the races of men ebbed and flowed across the face of Mindanao, like a disordered tide, the Moro raised a kris blade against them all. Joyfully, he raised that blade. The savage resistance of the Mohammedans to the conquistadores of Spain must stand as the most amazing epoch of military history--377 years of uninterrupted combat!" From Jungle Patrol December 1, 1937.

We are not responsible for the hatred these people have, any more than we are responsible for any other vipers or spiders that kill indiscriminately. And before you say we entered “their” region, the Philippines (Moros) and Europe are not the Moslem holy lands.

bane, did we invade muslim enclaves in Holland, last I checked we are firmly planted in Saudi Arabia and Iraq, the holiest places in the muslim world.

Can you explain to me where all these radical wahabi followers were in the past 5 hundred years, why where Tehran and Baghdad and Kabul all bastions of peace and education, who was coddling the Saud family, and building up their kingdom with petro-dollars, while giving military protection so they could the whole time placate their home grown terrorists, why do you think a lions share of the 9/11 hijakcers are from saudi arabia and not from Afghanistan or Iraq. You can take history out of context all you want, but all your doing is showing us exactly why people like yourself wanna see this war continue, this is vengence for these uppity sand-n*ggers who came into OUR land and messed stuff up, now we get a chance to show them our god has a bigger dick than theirs.

We have no troops in Saudi Arabia.

You should ease up the dosage there buddy.
You are taking one cult from a vast array of cults in the Islamic world and trying to connect the dots while ignoring all the dots around you.
You said the Islamic world kept the radical elements in check for “hundreds of years” which is just wrong. There have been radical elements throughout the entire history of Islam that have spread death and destruction throughout the world.

For hundreds of years, the cults of Islam have manufactured reasons for their hatred of Western cultures; we didn’t need to give them reasons. If is wasn't oil fields, it was the Suez Canal, before that it was ports, and before that it was trade routes. Our being anywhere on the same planet as them is sufficient reason to hate us.

Yours' is the deluded world view that if we just appease them, leave “their holy lands” they’ll live in peace apart from us. This isn’t true and never has been, theirs is an expansionist philosophy, we are not the imperialists, nor have we ever been imperialist in this region.

And the Islamists would most certainly have roving bands of thugs to prevent abortion, kill the mother, kill the doctors, and kill the fathers that would allow abortions to take place. There's a reality check for you.

Their bizarre religion not only precludes them from abortions, it precludes everyone from having access to abortions; Moslem or not.

One Thursday evening this past March, we managed to snag some rare couple time and, in a sudden rush of passion, I failed to insert my diaphragm.

OK, she just said it's her fault. "I failed to insert my diaphragm."

Game over, do not pass go, do not collect $200.00 dollars. I don't see the discussion going any further....except the MSM can't read their own writing.

If this were true, why did they manage to live quite peacefully as recently as 1960s, explain that little aborration...ill wait.

How is it you can lump an entire religion, and a billion and a half people into one group of crazy people, does that mean because we have groups of christians who advocate bombing abortion doctors then go through with it, that we can assume ALL christians are murderous thugs? We hear about the selacious few who cause trouble, yet we are not given the 99.9% of the others who live normal lives as taxi drivers, and doctors, teachers, and homemakers.

So does that mean we can start claiming all Spanish or Dutch, or British decendents are responsible for the imperialistic tendency of their forefathers? Does that mean all americans are still responsible because our history included slavery? You can't hold an entire religion to task because a VERY, VERY small sect of them cause problems, thats a non starting argument.

Kahn,

Sorry, I forgot about the withdrawl, although I don't think its gonna matter much with our 'Green Zone' taking over a bulk of Sultan's requirements as a foothold for the US in the Middle East.

Third eye,
Are you totally deranged? You are either completely ignorant of Islamists’ history or conveniently ignoring the generations of Moslem terrorism;

• 1964 - Founding of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) to support establishment of a Palestinian state. Some PLO members adhered to legal and political methods, and some committed acts of violence.
• 1967 - Mohammed bin Oud bin Laden, Yemeni immigrant to Saudi Arabia who eventually became wealthy as the owner of the largest construction firm in Saudi Arabia, was killed in a helicopter accident in Texas. His son Osama bin Laden, the 17th of 52 children, inherited millions of dollars.
• 1968 - Some members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) who wished to abandon political organization and focus on committing terrorist acts broke away from the group to form the new Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC)
• 1972 ~ Munich, Germany ~ Olympic Games
• 1974 ~ Carlos the Jackal, a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), threw a hand grenade into a drugstore in Paris, killing two people and injuring 34.
• 11/4/79 - 80 Iranian students invaded the US embassy in Tehran, Iran and took 52 US citizens hostage. The abductors demanded that the US extradite the overthrown Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi, who was in the US for medical treatment, so that they could execute him. US refused demand. The hostages were held until 1/20/81.
• 4/80 - 6 Islamic terrorists seized the Iranian embassy in London. They announced that they would kill a hostage every half hour, and killed two. The British anti-terrorist department SAS raided the embassy and killed 5 of the 6 terrorists. The remainder of the hostages were released unharmed.
• 1981 - Members of the Al-Jihad organization assassinated President Anwar Sadat of Egypt.
• 4/18/83 - Hizballah suicide bomber with the support of Iran and Libya crashed a pickup truck full of explosives into the US embassy in Beirut, Lebanon. 63 people killed, of whom 17 were US citizens. Among the 17, 8 worked for the CIA. Imad Mugniyah is a top suspect.
• 10/23/83 Shiite suicide bombers from the Hizballah organization, with the support of the government of Iran, bombed barracks in Beirut, Lebanon where US Marines and French paratroopers were housed. 299 were killed, including 241 US Marines. Bin Laden's terrorism "teacher", Imad Mugniyah allegedly involved in the planning.
• 12/12/83 - Shiite suicide truck bomber working for the government of Iran crashed into the US embassy in Kuwait. Additional attacks on the French embassy, apartments of Raytheon Corporation employees, the control tower of the airport, and an oil refinery. Total of 5 people killed (6, including one of the the truck bombers) and 80 injured. (Kuwait later arrested and convicted 17 suspects. When Iraq conquered Kuwait 8/2/90, Iraq released the 17, who have never been recaptured.)
• 11/20/84 - Truck bomb exploded outside the Aukar, Lebanon annex of the US embassy in Beirut. 24 people killed, including 2 US military personnel. The US attributed the act to to the pro-Iran Hizballah organization. Imad Mugniyah is a suspect.
• 12/3/84 - Kuwait Airways Flight 221 from Kuwait to Pakistan was hijacked and diverted to Tehran. Hijackers demanded the release of 17 suspects arrested by Kuwait for the 12/12/83 bombing of the US embassy in Kuwait. When the demand was refused, the hijackers killed 2 passengers who were US government employees. Iranian troops entered the plane, arrested the hijackers, released the passengers. Iran later released the hijackers instead of putting them on trial. (Imad Mughniyah alleged to have been involved in the planning of the hijacking.)
• 6/14/85 - TWA Flight 847 from Athens to Rome was hijacked and diverted to Beirut, Lebanon. Hijackers demanded the release of 500 Shiites imprisoned by Israel and the the 17 suspects imprisoned in Kuwait for the 12/12/83 bombing of the US embassy in Kuwait. Hijackers killed U.S. Navy Diver Robert Stethem and threw his body out onto the airport tarmac. Israel released some Shiite prisoners and some of the hostages were released. In 1987 the US government Hizballah leader Imad Mugniyah as a suspect in the planning, but he was never apprehended. Police in Frankfurt, Germany arrested suspect Mohammed Ali Hamadei, who was convicted in 1989 and sentenced to life in prison in Germany.
• 10/7/85 - Hijackers working for the government of Libya raided the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro near Egypt, took hostages, demanded the release of Palestinians imprisoned worldwide. Hijackers killed US citizen Leon Klinghoffer. Hijackers attempted to fly out of Egypt, US plane forced the plane down. Four suspects imprisoned in Italy. One of the convicts escaped from prison, and the government of Italy released one of them.
• 4/15/86 - In retaliation for the disco bombing of 4/5/86, the US, under orders from President Reagan, bombed Benghazi and Tripoli in Libya (Operation El Dorado Canyon). US Bombing of the home of Moammar Qadaffi didn't harm the Libyan leader, but killed his infant daughter. (After the bombing, Libyan militants associated with Abu Nidal retaliated by killing three US citizens employed by the University of Beirut.)
• 1/2/87 - Hostage negotiator Terry Waite, in Beirut, Lebanon to negotiate with Iranian Hizballah terrorists who were holding hostages, was made a hostage himself. (The United Nations sent another negotiator to meet with the Hizballah. Waite was released 11/91; later the others were released.)
• 12/23/88 - A bomb onboard 757 airliner Pan Am Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 270 (259 aboard and 11 town residents). US State Department said that intelligence linked the crime to both the government of Libya and the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine –
• 1991 - Saudia Arabia rejected Osama bin Laden's offer of his help in fighting Iraq, and then permitted US troops to use its military bases.

Bane,

You can't read, can you? You just like assuming what my point was, did I not ask about Baghdad and Tehran and Kabul in the 60's?

You list while very accurate, shows the backlash of militiristic islam. You're trying to confuse the history of Palestine, and by extension the PLO, with the wider middle east which by this point wasn't embroiled in homegrown terrorism. The PLO was SECULAR group (putz). Thats like saying the mere existance of ETA proves that Europe and by extension christians are militiristic. Why don't you research who the Wahhabis are, and find out their history.

The muslim brotherhood, which was the banner group that all these splinter groups formed from, is all based on the teachings of its Sufi-practicing leader Hassan al-Banna, who was directly influenced by Wahhabi teaching in Saudi Arabia, so as you can see, thanks to oil revenues from western nations, and further military protection of those resources for western nations we incubated these nuts. You can blame anyone you want, but all these crazies are funded and taught through Saudi schools and "charities". Who is the sugar-daddy of the Kingdom of Saud, yup thats good ole petro-junky, Uncle Sam and the vast majority of the rest of the western world.

so how about YOU read some moslem history, please, go read where the middle-class and educated classes were in the 60's before the Brotherhood gained footholds in the middle east, Tehran, Baghdad and Kabul were jewels of the moslem world, know for tolerance and education, thats before the nuts starting blowing people up, including the middle class, and they started moving elsewhere, all the while we were still sucking at the petro-tit, not much caring what we would reap, leave it to the US government to back the wrong horse.

phnxbmed wrote:

"Getting an abortion may not confirm someone is a liberal but it's a pretty good clue. When they then blame THEIR OWN ACTIONS in taking that life on anyone else, and especially on the liberals most popluar target, President Bush, that's confirmation."

No, willingness to get an abortion tells you nothing about the woman's political leanings. It's not evidence, not even a clue.

You are obviously ignorant of the fact that for generations, while females from a poor background went to back-alley butchers to get an abortion, the daughters and sometimes wives of wealthy, "respectable" families were sent to nice, clean, neat and, most important, discreet private hospitals and clinics located all over the country to get a "D&C," which in fact was an abortion. Don't try to tell me those well-off families were all liberal and Democrat. That doesn't compute.

As for blame shifting, anyone who supports President Bush has to have a high tolerance for industrial-strength blame shifting. It's standard Bush operating procedure.

phnxbmed wrote:

"Getting an abortion may not confirm someone is a liberal but it's a pretty good clue. When they then blame THEIR OWN ACTIONS in taking that life on anyone else, and especially on the liberals most popluar target, President Bush, that's confirmation."

No, willingness to get an abortion tells you nothing about the woman's political leanings. It's not evidence, not even a clue.

You are obviously ignorant of the fact that for generations, while females from a poor background went to back-alley butchers to get an abortion, the daughters and sometimes wives of wealthy, "respectable" families were sent to nice, clean, neat and, most important, discreet private hospitals and clinics located all over the country to get a "D&C," which in fact was an abortion. Don't try to tell me those well-off families were all liberal and Democrat. That doesn't compute.

As for blame shifting, anyone who supports President Bush has to have a high tolerance for industrial-strength blame shifting. It's standard Bush operating procedure.

Once again, you make a statement, and then attempt to run from the inaccuracy by changing the subject.
You wrote, “

For hundreds of years they kept their nuts quite definately contained in small groups, and noone in the wider muslim world took them very seriously"

Get this trough your thick skull; Americans aren’t to blame for all the worlds’ ills, some people hate, they hate for no good reason, like you hate America, some Moslems hate the twentieth century, much less the 21st. Some hate the West, and some hate non-Moslems. Some people hate success, they hate people that don’t spend their lives crying and blaming others for their position in life. Some people hate the rich for not being one; they hate the achievers because they cannot achieve themselves. They hate free people because they are enslaved by their own prejudices.
That is a fact of the world,

Radical Islam existed long before oil was discovered in Arabia; it existed in the middle ages when the Crusades were fought as a defensive war, to push back the Moslem aggressor. It existed at the turn of the last century in London when radical elements plotted to overthrow the Crown; it existed long before Reagan and long before Rumsfeld had his photo taken in Baghdad, it exists today in regions where oil, petrodollars, or wealth of any kind exists.

But go ahead and buy into the nonsense that Westerners are responsible for the carnage, if it makes you sleep better to have someone you know to blame; but no one that reads buys into your fantasies.

Once again, you make a statement, and then attempt to run from the inaccuracy by changing the subject.
You wrote, “

For hundreds of years they kept their nuts quite definately contained in small groups, and noone in the wider muslim world took them very seriously"

Get this trough your thick skull; Americans aren’t to blame for all the worlds’ ills, some people hate, they hate for no good reason, like you hate America, some Moslems hate the twentieth century, much less the 21st. Some hate the West, and some hate non-Moslems. Some people hate success, they hate people that don’t spend their lives crying and blaming others for their position in life. Some people hate the rich for not being one; they hate the achievers because they cannot achieve themselves. They hate free people because they are enslaved by their own prejudices.
That is a fact of the world,

Radical Islam existed long before oil was discovered in Arabia; it existed in the middle ages when the Crusades were fought as a defensive war, to push back the Moslem aggressor. It existed at the turn of the last century in London when radical elements plotted to overthrow the Crown; it existed long before Reagan and long before Rumsfeld had his photo taken in Baghdad, it exists today in regions where oil, petrodollars, or wealth of any kind exists.

But go ahead and buy into the nonsense that Westerners are responsible for the carnage, if it makes you sleep better to have someone you know to blame; but no one that reads buys into your fantasies.

No, willingness to get an abortion tells you nothing about the woman's political leanings. It's not evidence, not even a clue.

Exactly. It can be the source of great hypocrisy, though:

Anti-abortion protestors getting abortions.

In a nutshell:

We have anti-choice women in for abortions all the time. Many of them are just naive and ignorant until they find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy. Many of them are not malicious. They just haven't given it the proper amount of thought until it completely affects them. They can be judgmental about their friends, family, and other women. Then suddenly they become pregnant. Suddenly they see the truth. That it should only be their own choice. Unfortunately, many also think that somehow they are different than everyone else and they deserve to have an abortion, while no one else does.

Mmmmm, that's good hypocrisy!

Well done, Bane!

Islam has been "radical" since the "prophet" Muhammad invented it. Muhammad fought or led in 66 battles. Here's one of those battles-the battle of the Ditch (AD 627): [click "Index to Islam, "M", "Muhammad"]

"A Jewish tribe living in Madinah. After Muhammad migrated to it following hostilities from the Meccans, many Madinans came to accept Islam. However, many of the Jews were not impressed with Muhammad and his message. The Qur'an revelations began to change in tone and nature, becoming hostile to the Jews and inciting the Muslims to fight infidels. Muhammad expelled two Jewish tribes Banu Qaynuqa and Banu Al-Nadir from Madinah.

Banu Qurayza, however, suffered a much worse fate. In the battle of the Ditch (AD 627), Banu Qurayza was said to have sided with the Meccans against the Muslims, which were victorious (they actually refused to help the Meccans). As a result, the 700 hundred male Jews were beheaded, while their children and women became slaves. The judgment was given by one stern Sad, and Muhammad commended him for his judgment:

When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad's judgment, Allah's Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah's Apostle said (to the Ansar), "Stand up for your leader." Then Sad came and sat beside Allah's Apostle who said to him. "These people are ready to accept your judgment." Sad said, "I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners." The Prophet then remarked, "O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah." (Sahih Bukhari 4.280)

(from link)-The "prophet" Muhammad is the model to all Muslims. The quranic basis for the obligation to obey not only the Qur'an but all of Muhammad's words and deeds is laid down in al-Ahzab 33:21, an-Najm 53:2-4" :

(Qur'an 33:21) Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent exemplar for him who hopes in Allah and the latter day and remembers Allah much.

(Qur'an 53:2-4) Your Companion is neither astray nor being misled.
Nor does he say (aught) of (his own) Desire.
It is no less than inspiration sent down to him.

Muhammad was a murderer, torturer, thief, etc (see link) and Muslims from Muhammad's time followed his example and his teachings-especially the Islamic teaching to fight all non-Muslims until Islam dominates the world:

Narrated Ibn 'Umar:
Allah's Apostle said: "I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity, so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me except for Islamic laws and then their reckoning (accounts) will be done by Allah." (Sahih Bukhari 1.24)

Sword Verse in the Qu'ran (9:5):

Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

(from link): This verse, according to many Muslim commentators, abrogates [replaces] the earlier peaceful verses in the Qur'an involving treatment of non-Muslims. "The Sword Verse...allows Muslims to compel non-Muslims to accept Islam."

This is exactly what Muhammad did. He compelled non-Muslims to except Islam. He gave them 3 choices: convert to Islam, pay the extortion tax (jizha), or die.

Following Muhammad's death in 632 AD, his Muslim followers continued to wage war against and compel non-Muslims to except Islam for over 400 years until Pope Urban II finally called for the First Crusade in 1095 AD. Look at the list of Muslim battles. (scroll down)

(partial list from link:)
634-644 The Caliphate of Umar ibn al-Khattab, who is regarded as particularly brutal.

635 Muslim Crusaders besiege and conquer of Damascus

636 Muslim Crusaders defeat Byzantines decisively at Battle of Yarmuk.

637 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq at the Battle of al-Qadisiyyah (some date it in 635 or 636)

638 Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.

638-650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.

639-642 Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.

641 Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.

643-707 Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.
^^^^^^^^^

Many Islamic scholars agree that offensive war to spread Islam is justified. Here's one Islamic scholar from the link:

Azhar’s Scholars in Egypt
(link:)-In his book, "Jurisprudence in Muhammad’s Biography", the Azhar scholar, Dr. Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti says the following (page 134, 7th edition):

"The Holy War, as it is known in Islamic Jurisprudence, is basically an offensive war. This is the duty of Muslims in every age when the needed military power becomes available to them. This is the phase in which the meaning of Holy War has taken its final form. Thus the apostle of God said: ‘I was commanded to fight the people until they believe in God and his message ..."’

Freedom1,

I'll have to say one thing, You sure have taken a tremendous load, No one has had the guts to take on all these these except you, Courage and wits combined, a very admirable trait.

Although I'll tell you that Third Eye fellow, Let me tell ya' He is filled with DEMONS, I honestly believe that, Every time he posts just look at the hate in his words, The man is filled with Demons!!!

Thanks, Jeremiah!
:)

Bane of Liberals' Existence and phnxbmed are on the job, too. Thanks guys. This issue is too important to shy away from.

"willingness to get an abortion tells you nothing about the woman's political leanings. It's not evidence, not even a clue. Your obviously ignorant of ...blah blah blah...Don't try to tell me those well-off families were all liberal and Democrat. That doesn't compute." S.W. Anderson

I am well aware of the historical antecedents of the pro-abortion movement. You don't need to quote ancient history to me SW. BTW: Where did you ever get the idea that I even implied that ALL women who seek abortions are liberal dems? Are you intellectually challenged, or just reading impaired?

You are also obviously ignorant of deductive reasoning. Its a FACT that the percentage of pro-life democrats is miniscule, and while there are probably a greater number of pro-choice republicans, they are still a small minority. Therefore, when a woman seeks and abortion there is a better than even probability that she is a liberal dem. This would be true even is a number of pro-life republicans sought abortions, because the likelyhood of that is small.

Am I going to fast for you?

That probabilty converts to a certitude when she chooses to publically (in the press) make a political statement by blaming the President for her irresponsible murderous act.

Get a clue, clueless.

Bane and Freedom,

You guys just don't get it do you?

lets go ahead and debunk your stupid assertions, AGAIN!

1. You claim Islam is a religion who apparently want nothing more than to take over the world, screw your daughters, and kick your dog. Quite frankly you guys sound pretty scared of them. I wonder what it's like finding bogey-men behind every corner.

You've quoted history that is no different than christian OFFENSIVE crusades, perhaps you forgot that they were raping and pillaging with the best of them, those good ole white-boys.

"In 1095 Pope Urban II proclaimed the First Crusade to regain the Holy Land and at the Council of Clermont he urged all Christians to take up the cross and strive for a goals that not only promised spiritual but material rewards as well.

At the end of his oration the crowd shouted "God wills it".

The Pope clearly saw in the crusade an outlet for the energy of quarreling nobles despite the fact that the pope called it a holy war. The word crusade itself is derived from taking the cross, and the pope assured the crusaders that if they took part in this campaign they would be forgiven all of their past sins.

Also the pope would awaken religious enthusiasm that had been on the wane by creating the crusades as well as strengthen his claim to the moral leadership of Europe."

We can argue to infinity if you really want about who started what and for what reason, and who were more the bad guys, but i'd like to focus on more recent history, since Christians always claim they went through a revival and left their barbaric ways behind them.

You still haven't addressed my point that there were great centers of thought and art and modern, western ideals throughout the muslim world.

You refuse to admit we bear some responsibility for the people we back, and the reactions that follow. We could have used our influence in oil producing nations such as Saudi Arabia to push them along a more socially uplifting route, but instead we turned blind eyes to a building storm, then we shrug our shoulders and invade a country which held no threat to us in retribution, what a bunch of hypocrites.

If you wanna find a few texts that advocate YOUR view of modern islam, then you're doing your reading an injustice, how about giving the whole story and quoting the IMMENSE pool of moderate Imams, worldwide who are teaching peace and reconciliation with the West, pehaps you foget they still hold Jesus and the Holy Bible in extremely high regards.

"Shaykh Tantawi has stated that the Koran "specifically forbids the kinds of things the Taliban and al-Qaida are guilty of," Pitts said.

Shaykh Tantawi, Pitts continued, has said that the "jihad" Usama bin Laden has called for against America "is invalid and not binding on Muslims."

Pitts quoted the Grand Shaykh as saying, "Islam rejects all of these acts." The Shaykh added that terrorism is un-Islamic, Pitts said."

"Just a few days ago, the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, the highest and most respected Islamic authority in the world, who resides in Egypt, also made this clear. The Grand Imam said that the Koran specifically forbids the kinds of things the Taliban and al-Qaida are guilty of. He said the jihad Usama bin Laden has called for against America is invalid and not binding on Muslims. He said that "Islam rejects all of these acts." He called terrorism un-Islamic. In fact, he says, "Killing innocent civilians is a horrific, hideous act that no religion can approve."

"Bin Laden is not a prophet that we should put thousands of lives at risk for," said Tahirul Qadri, who heads the Pakistani Awami Tehrik Party.

Qadri, who has thousands of followers in Pakistan and abroad, also criticized the Taliban for sheltering bin Laden and urged the Muslims to "see the difference between jihad and acts of terrorism."

so as you can see these are just a few of the MANY moderate clerics throughout the greater muslim world who don't seem to buy into OBLs little holy war. But you don't seem to mention any of them; why is that? Why is it that you quote the history of Islam in its nascent stages, nearly 1300 years ago? Can we assume by that logic that because christians still have nuts who feel the need to blow up abortion clinics, or threaten the lives of doctors that we can shove every single christian into the same boat?

3 Eyes,

You are obviously ignorant of US history. Ever heard the Marine Corp hymn? "From the shores of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli".

In 1801 President Thomas Jefferson sent the US Navy and the Marines to the Barbary coast to stop the Muslim ruler of Tripoli raiding our ships, taking hostages and demanding ransom. The FIRST Barbary War raged from 1801 to 1805, ending in a US victory and safe passage for US shipping until later in the decade deteriorating relations with France and Britain, led us to withdraw our naval forces from the Med. The Dey of Algiers expelled the US consul general Tobias Lear and declared war on the United States for FAILING TO PAY THE REQUIRED TRIBUTE (called dhimmi a tax on all non-muslims demanded by the KORAN). Since there were no American vessels in the region at this time, the challenge went unanswered. After the War of 1812 with the Brits, we again fought the Muslims in the SECOND Barbary War. On March 3, 1815 the US Congress authorized deployment of naval power against Algiers, and a force of ten ships was dispatched under the command of Commodores Stephen Decatur, Jr. and William Bainbridge.

Decatur and Bainbridge used the pirates' tactics against them. Taking hundreds of prisoners in an attack on Algiers, Decatur bargained for a treaty releasing the United States from any tribute obligations in perpetuity, as well as $10,000 in reparations for damages to the US. By June 30, 1815 the treaty was signed and the threat of Barbary pirates to American vessels was at an end.

No sooner had Decatur set off for Tunis to enforce a similar agreement than the Dey repudiated the treaty. The next year, an Anglo-Dutch fleet, commanded by British admiral Viscount Exmouth, delivered a punishing, nine-hour bombardment of Algiers. The attack immobilized many of the dey's corsairs and obtained from him a second treaty that reaffirmed the conditions imposed by Decatur. In addition, the dey agreed to END THE PRACTISE OF ENSLAVING CHRISTIANS.

Do we see a pattern of Muslim behavior here? hmmm? So since the begining of our history Muslims have been attacking us, taking hostages as slaves, demanding ransom, demanding dhimmi tribute, all of which has resulted in a military response to protect our interests.

Convenient how you libs seem to forget history when it suits you. Oh that's right, you younger libs can't be blamed, US history is no longer taught in school. Its been replaced by diversity training and courses in self esteem. You older libs must have all be out back smokin' some weed during history class, or protesting against "the man".

Three eyes,

Ever since 9/11 the number of Islamic leaders to publically condemn these terrorist actions has been remarkably small. Try to name more than an handful. In fact even those who have tepidly said the actions were wrong, almost universally blamed the US for inciting these acts.

What's more, while those you have cited may reject OBL as a prophet, have they rejected any part of the KORAN which calls for dhimmi or death to infidels? NO NOT ONE!

You are the one who just doesn't get it.

It's amazing how this woman is focusing on all of the people she feels contributed to her problem while completely ignoring the possibility that she may have any responsibility whatsoever.

Nice, phnxbmed!

Three Eyes-"We can argue to infinity if you really want about who started what and for what reason, and who were more the bad guys..."

Who started it?!? What part of Muslims attacking Christendom-Christians and Christian lands FOR 400 YEARS-don't you understand??

Well, here we have Islamhater1 taking this topic way off course into another hate all that is Islam thread.

Did they give you the boot from your Islam hate site Freedom1??

How old are you, Axis? Three?

The truth hurts doesn't it Islamhater1? This topic has nothing to do with Islam, yet you always find ways to bring your hate in don't you?

I can only assume that since you are here, rather than on the Islam hate site, they must have given you the heave ho

Conservative and Phnxbmed,

There is a WIDE feeling among the greater moderate muslim world that what OBL and Zarqawi are doing is comepletely against the Koran. I've given you some MAJOR clerics (don't forget their are no real leaders in islam, only teachers) who have come out on the issue, and condemned it, you'll have to excuse the ones who fear for their lives from extremists and can't make a world-wide platform, but that doesn't mean in their local schools and mosques they aren't discussing these issues and explaining the fallacy of this Wahhabi teaching; but when you invade a muslin nation without them attacking you, and then can't provide any concrete proof, then continue to stay, then continue to build the world's largest army base/consulate, you're bound to piss off a whole lotta moderate muslims, and make it that much easier for the nutjobs to get emotional/rhetorical traction. Just because all you see are the ones causing strife, doesn't mean you get to throw EVERY muslim into the same boat, you know as well as I do that showing a nice quiet, moderate mosque teaching the REAL meaning of the Koran doesn't sell like a riot in Pakistan where they are burning an american flag, quit buying into the MSM you always say gives you 1/4 of the truth. Do you remember the outpouring from all over the world after 9/11, even in Tehran there were students who were breaking out the candles and observing moments of silence for the fallen, no we dont remember those images, we have long since passed the time when we could have used that sentiment to advocate a step back from these ideologues, and instead have fed their cause more than OBL could have EVER imagined.

You guys want to use conquest and war to explain today's realities, the middle east has been a place of turmoil for years, just as Europe was a place of turmoil, if you remember correctly almost the entirety of Europe was ripped apart, TWICE in the lifetimes of some people on this planet, and for generations upon generations before that CHRISTIANS were killing, conquering, and being all around jerk-offs, but its quite conveneient to say that is behind us, nevermind imperialism, because we got towel-heads to make our bogey-man of the decade.

you want muslims clerics to reject portions of the Koran, then you take it up with them in an open dialogue, embrace discussion and debate, not war. I'm sure we can both come up with reading of the bible that advocate some pretty bad things; I mean how many southern baptists still rely on bible teachings of female servitude to justify beatings and social cielings, how many fundamentalists read in the bible that killing gays is advocated by their God, or killing abortion doctors is alright, cuz God said so. Clean up your own mess before you start trying to clean up someone else's sewer.

The point I am still making is that we traded a blind eye for cheap resources, and we continue to find new reasons to coddle tyrants such as the Kingdom of Saud or the dynasty in Azerbaijan because they hook us up with oil, but we are more than happy to ignore the killing, and hate, and the seeds of the very terrorists we claim popped out of the ether all of a sudden. You can't make the case that the WHOLE muslim world wants to create a world-wide caliphate, when most of them would like to just work on a government who stops jailing editors and squashing protests for REAL democratic change with Military coup, after military coup...oh by the way backed up by our benevolent nation, you remember where our buddy Musharaf came from?

3 eyes,

As I have said before, judge a religion by the message, not the messangers. Sure there are kooks in every religion. But Islam is the ONLY one which advocates the subjgation and or killing of non-believers in their holy scriptures.

This is a major flaw in their "religion of peace". Mohammed made this religion up out of whole cloth, taking from Christianity and Judiasm and adding his own perverted ideas. He was the Elron Hubbard of the 6th Century. Shari'a Law, is practised by most Muslims around the world, and it has been adpted by a number of governments as the law of the land. Read up on it and then tell us all again how this is the "religion of peace". Tell us all again how the "honor killing" of women are justified. Tell us again how stoning deaths jibe with your concept of 21st Century justice.

Jesus said hate the sin, not the sinner. I don't hate the muslims, I think they are mostly deluded by the teachings of this 6th century lunatic.

Wow...we have been all over the world and it all started with this poor lady who in her own anguish took the low road and blamed someone else. We are all guilty of that I am certain at some point in our lives but deep down, I think we know the truth.

On the other hand, I see a dangerous trend developing. I am not sure, I have my opinions that are hard to prove, why there is such hatred for our President. Without question he is a man of conviction that has done a very good job of ignoring the naysayers and those that are attacking him for virtually everything. How different the world would be if those insults that were not true hurled against you or anyone fell against deaf ears and eventually went away.

The problems that the West is facing with the East today go all the way back to Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael. Read it in the Bible where it states that Ishmael, who would be blessed tremendously, would always be at odds with his brother in the West as Ishmael and his offspring would be a "wild-donkey." Could that be how the DNC got it's symbol? I don't know and could never prove it and honestly, don't really care.

But one thing I am certain of: Clarity of truth, rational reasoning, open minds, calm discussions, validated facts and few choice words will always prevail. I am also certain that there are "lost" people out there who, well, act like they are lost. They are so miserable and know no peace in their soul that they rush to judgement about everything and seem to have no moral compass, don't understand or believe absolutes and have a hard time hanging on or finding something solid. That is why I believe that in addition to the items above, conviction....conviction based on logic and reasoning is a good thing AND I believe our President demonstrates that.

One day the lady who this blog is really for will come to herself, if she hasn't already, and realize that to blame others probably wasn't the most thought out response and she will hopefully settle into a peaceful understanding that her anger doesn't help matters and just makes it worse.

Finally, as I review all of the comments and look at the world stage and see the immensity of turmoil, confusion, anger, hatred and delusion, I am reminded that there is only 1 thing that can settle all of it. That 1 thing is actually a person. That person is Jesus. Only God Himself has the power to settle these matters and provide peace and clarity to every single issue we face today, big or small. I have been to Africa and I have personal encounters with demons who have told me that I don't belong there. That confirmed to me that there are battles going on around us that are probably greater than anything we can cook up on a blog. Realizing that, my reality constantly needs to be re-assessed as I just might be wrong about a few things I hear from others.

This is priceless: I came to see how people were addressing the WaPo article and stumbled on someone who actually believes Jesus did away with the Law. I'm sorry, Freedom my friend, but you've spent too long listening to a preacher and too little doing serious academic study of the texts themselves. Or perhaps the Sermon on the Mount is irrelevant to you? Recall the part where Jesus explicitly stated that he did not come to do away with even a "jot or tittle" of the Law, but that believers must follow every last commandment or else he would not know them come the end? Or did you miss the part where he instructed people to obey the priests in the Temple after he healed them? Or how about how his followers, including Paul, continued to follow the Laws of the Sabbath and the Temple regulations, including making sacrifices (in Acts) after his death when that was supposedly over? Or maybe you didn't read about Paul's staunch support for all the Laws and for making converts attend synagogue on the Sabbath? What do you think they learned in the Jewish synagogues? The Law.

So Jesus said to keep the Law or he wouldn't know you. Then his followers not only kept the Law, but advocated immediately teaching new converts parts of the Law then sending them to the synagogue to learn the rest. They even brought converts to the Temple to offer sacrifices. They argued like Pharisees among one another over what was clean to eat and what wasn't, with Paul continuing to eat according to the strict interpretation of the Law fighting with Peter who was eating according to the strict interpretation most of the time, but according to the Phariseeic interpretation (a few steps further along the way to modern kosher) when with them. I see. Very convenient with your holy books, aren't we Christian?

Phnxbmed said it well. I just want to emphasize one thing-

"Jesus said hate the sin, not the sinner. I don't hate the muslims, I think they are mostly deluded by the teachings of this 6th century lunatic." Posted by: phnxbmed

I agree. Jesus said to "love your enemy" and "do good things for them". I want Muslims around the world to live in freedom and democracy and especially to live without the tyranny of Islam.

Phnxbmed said it well. I just want to emphasize one thing-

"Jesus said hate the sin, not the sinner. I don't hate the muslims, I think they are mostly deluded by the teachings of this 6th century lunatic." Posted by: phnxbmed

I agree. Jesus said to "love your enemy" and "do good things for them". I want Muslims around the world to live in freedom and democracy and especially to live without the tyranny of Islam.

It's lucky for the peace of the world that most christians and muslims (c. 1.6 billion) aren't listening to freedom1, and never will listen to freedom1's demand that 'Islam should be utterly destroyed'. Just as well, as it would lead to some worldwide unpleasantness, and further damage to the US reputation. Please take all further similar rants to the 'all religion should be banned' thread. As an independent observer, I can't help but be impressed by ThirdEye's ability to slice up his opponents with well-informed comments (whether one agrees with them or not), this person is like a whirling dervish with light-sabers attached to each limb. How many people is Third really? Can we get back on-topic now, please?

TheGlimmering,

Jesus ended the sacrificial system with his sacrifice and death on the cross.

Heb 7:27 who needeth not daily, like those high
priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for
his own sins, and then for the sins of
the people: for this he did ONCE FOR ALL,
when he offered up himself.

The law that was done away with was the MOSAIC LAW.

Col 2:14 having blotted out the bond written in
ordinances that was against us, which
was contrary to us: and he hath taken
it out that way, nailing it to the cross

Note the 'written ordinances' were nailed to the cross. The Mosaic law was WRITTEN by Moses. The Ten Commandments were from the hand of God, these were not done away with at the cross.

Keeping the Sabbath is the 4th Commandment, this was never done away with.

Ex 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it
holy.

Refering to food, you are no doubt refering to Peter's dream in Acts 10 about clean and unclean foods. If you will read the entire text you will see that was not about food, but accepting of all people.

Acts 10:28 and he said unto them, Ye yourselves
know how it is an unlawful thing for a
man that is a Jew to join himself or
come unto one of another nation; and
yet unto me hath God showed that I
should not call any man common or
unclean.

TheGlimmering,

Are you a Christian? Do you know that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, the divine Son of God?