“I think that any religion that demands earthly vengeance and retribution, for any reason, is not really a religion at all, but an illness - and should be treated as such.” Pat Condell (on YouTube.com)

'Nuff said?

Ok, thx, much appreciated. Sorry it took so long to get back to you. I have been avoiding the comments section (and Jihad Watch, in general) since my recent keel-hauling by a small minority of Jihad Watch misunderstanders and extremists. I find the best way to punish them is to ignore them, and go to other websites where people are more civilized to each other.

Best wishes in the future! Hope to see you again soon (preferably on some other website, though.)

Ken

You've phrased that very nicely, and I agree completely. As others have said (and proved) far better than me, on average the Judeo-Christian-faith-based countries are doing WAY better on quality-of-living (and pumping out WAY more technology) than the rest of the world combined. We must be doing something right, since everyone else seems to be falling all over themselves to immigrate here, whenever the opportunity arises. Thx for the reply, I liked the way you summed it all up & put a bow on the thought. I can't think of anything more to add.

You make an interesting counter-argument, "Separation of church and state gives us our current situation that we now have in the USA. " Could you please expand some more upon it?

Specifically, can you say more about "the destruction of millions of innocent people among us". I am not sure what you mean, exactly. What people, where in America, and how are their lives being destroyed? I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing; I am just a bit confused who exactly you are refering to, and would appreciate more info, please, to help clear this up.

As for "despicable murderers live out their lives behind bars rather than being hung as they should. ", I feel much the same way, but with some minor reservations (which have nothing to do with the point you are making, so I'll keep them to myself, for now.)

As for the "hand of God" showing us absolute moral values, well ... I just got out of one fecal hurricane with someone who took offense from some of my views as an atheist, so I don't think I even want to go there - I'm still suffering from 3rd degree burns of the soul. I will, however, completely agree that Americans could use some seriously better core moral values than the ones I see being practiced today. The massive, country-wide orgy of lies, cheating, greed, false pride, and shady business practices that came together to cause the mortgage meltdown proves that in spades.

"... we stray farther and farther from true truth.", well, no argument there. And the truth has a way of catching up with us (usually with compound interest), sooner or later, whenever we do.

To Rose Warren;

I apologize, in advance, for the off-topic comment I am about to make; but, I am a new-comer to this site, and I don't know any other way of sending a message to you, and I felt time was important. So hear goes :

Short version : I was wrong, wrong, wrong about you, and I owe you a very very very long, sincere, and public apology. I recently (a few days ago) jumped to conclusions about you and accused you of being a cyber-bully (among other things), all of which turned out to be completely mistaken, now that I have been able to gather more information.

I want to very publicly retract 100% of the accusations I made about you, and ask humbly for your forgiveness, if you can find it in your heart to forgive me, after I am done retracting and apologizing.

If you are willing to listen, I can & will give a fuller explanation of what happened, but those are the important points. I was 100% completely wrong about you, I greatly regret jumping to conclusions about you, and I wish to make whatever public amends or apologies that I can, to show that I am truely sorry for the gaping lapse in judgement I have made, and my poor behavior towards you in general.

Just say the word, and I will fill in all the details.

I'd like to see some evidence - this sounds suspisciously like a false comparison, i.e. "comparing apples & oranges". How many Turks were captured, compared to Americans? If there was only one Turk, and he survived, then it doesn't prove much. (I am exaggerating, to make a point, please don't flame me for it.)

I am not saying you are wrong, I just want you to prove what you claim, please. A hyperlink to an authoritative source on the Korean War would be nice, Adheeb, if you can provide one (or more.) Otherwise, I find it hard to take your claim (that no captured Turks died in captivity during the Korean War) seriously - it flies in the face of common sense. Turks have a reputation for toughness, but they are not invulnerable.

The part you have highlighted (in caps) just plays the religion card again - and seperation of church & state should (in theory) trump that. Religious superstition is no excuse to deny others of their rights, in any modern society - regardless of the religion or the society. The fact that a handicapped person was involved just makes it that much worse.

Muslims need to move into the 21st century, and start tempering their religious mythology with some common sense and respect for others less fortunate, regardless of whether the Muslims are the minority or not. [I know - that would be apostacy, and punishable by death - not going to go there. Others have already done it far better than I could.] Denying a blind person the services of a fully-trained guide animal on religious grounds is cruel, heartless, and just plain wrong - morally, as well as legally - regardless of the number of Muslims living in the country. It's a hell of a lot easier for the Muslims to get off the bus - if they truly fear the loss of their divine protection from harm - than for a blind person to travel in safety in a sighted world, without the help of a guide animal, day-in and day-out. They'd have to be blind not to see that ... or operating on blind faith.

So I agree whole-heartedly with you, Awakened - but for different reasons.

P.S. What about guide monkeys, or house cats, or tigers? (A tiger would make the Muslims think twice before complaining or getting hysterical, lol.) Would that be halal or haram?

Maybe there is a third alternative, while we are waiting for sanity to prevail over superstition. I imagine there must be animals smaller than a horse that can be trained. Any one? Of course, a Muslim charity should pay for the (halal) guide animal, and the training. It's a small price for the Muslims to pay, in order to get their divine protectors back on the bus with them. The blind man would get a free guide animal, which makes this a win-win situation.

Thank you - both of you - for making these points clear (even if it did take several visits to the dictionary and thesaurus for me to follow some of it.) I find your give-and-take analysis unusually well-thought through, and it was an inspriation to read both sides.

I have to side with Hesperado, though. Survival HAS to be the #1 priority. Any person, group of people, or meme that does not survive can not replicate into the next generation, and is lost (at least until someone re-invents the wheel, in the case of the meme.)

I would hope that people will try to deal with Muslims as human beings, (as Dumbledoorsarmy suggests, if I read your writing correctly), wherever possible to do so without sacrificing safety (as Herperado suggests, if I read that correctly as well), and that the West tries to redeem as many Muslims as are capable and worthy of redemption. A human life is a terrible thing to waste.

You are right that most laws ORIGINATE from religion (i.e. shared religious beliefs), but they get their ultimate legitimacy (legal staying power) from logic and precedent, in deveoped countries. That is why we in America (and Jews in Israel) do not stone adulterors to death, even tho the religious obligation is clearly laid out in the Old Testament. It would go against logic (we forbid cruel and unusual punishment) and precedent (Jesus saying, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone", which abrogated/cancelled out stoning for adultury in the New Testament.)

Laws that are not backed up by logic or previous experience (of being useful) rarely last more than one generation in the developed world (if that long.) That is why stonings have fallen by the wayside in developed countries. We recognize that it's better for everyone if the persons concerned get marriage councilling, or a divorce, than a swarm of big freakin' rocks, regardless of what the Old or New Testaments have to say about it. This is also one of the major differences between the Western world, and the Muslim world. We know when to put a leash on our sacred relgious beliefs, and do not follow them blindly.

Q.E.D. (quad erat demonstratum, "[that] which was to be demonstrated"), logic & precedence give legitimacy to laws in the developed world, not religion (or mythology, depending on your point of view.) Seperation of church & state ROCKS!

Speaking of which, I don't suppose you'd care to delete some (or even all) of the profanity-laced replies you have been making, insulting my character, my honor, and my manhood? That would be a good first step towards proving you really are the decent human being that others have told me about. Actions speak louder than words; or, as Jesus once said, "you shall know them [good people] by their fruit [deeds]."

Good men fight fair, and don't descend to profanity and mudslinging as a first resort. Those replies certainly do not paint a very honorable picture of you, for future readers to see. It would be a good thing for your reputation, if you send the worst of them off to the bit bucket.