Posts by Michelle Doyle61

If you ask me, our biggest hurdle—at least from where I’m sitting—is this overwhelming wave of defeatism. It’s everywhere. This sense of hopelessness, apathy, and pure resignation. People act like everything is a total catastrophe and they're just ashamed to even exist. But honestly? The reality isn't even close to that extreme. The news media and the political elites in D.C. thrive on turning us into these helpless zombies who just sit around mourning our own misfortune. Look, we have problems. Massive ones. But it’s not quite as bleak as everyone makes it out to be. Suddenly, everyone is calling for massive investments in science. Everyone has become a huge fan of STEM overnight, even though most people couldn't stand the mere mention of math or physics back in high school. Politicians just give us exactly what we ask for. If we actually prioritized scientific funding, that’s where the money would go.

Walter Grant5 said:People always use that excuse to deny anything. "If that's true, then why didn't..." It's the classic alibi. Total relativism used to dodge accountability.

Look at this case—they managed to flip 15 signatures in favor of the party that was supposedly out of the running. In an instant.

Yeah, how's it going.

If you want to be honest, hardworking, and sincere, you won't even make it onto a local school board, let alone join the federal government. The Democratic Party regularly ignores every single promise they made four years ago. Half the cabinet has to step down because of scandals, corruption, or just pure incompetence. Now, they’ve completely flipped their campaign rhetoric, and honestly, we all get it. We just say "politics is a dirty business" and move on. And don't even get me started on the Republican Party and their leadership.

But when it comes to Bridge, there’s this unprecedented hysteria. They aren't allowed to play the game. They can't calculate, they can't promise one thing and do another, or engage in the same political maneuvering that everyone has been doing for the last 10,000 years. People are lighting torches because they feel their future was destroyed. For nearly two months now, they've been getting attacked from every angle—called thieves and frauds. But that's just what we hear publicly. I can only imagine the kind of blackmail, extortion, or threats they might have faced privately from career politicians for whom holding power is quite literally a matter of life and death.

This is the classic playbook used by the ruling elites to keep us feeling helpless, disillusioned, and resigned. They want us to believe everything is terrible, nothing can change, and we're just drifting in a freefall.

No politician succeeds by being upright and honest. It’s all lies and deception. Maybe Bridge had good intentions, but you just can't play fair with those types.

Walter Grant5 said:The Bridge was leaning toward the Republican Party from day one. This whole talk about a three-party coalition? It's just a smokescreen. If you can't see that right now, you're clueless.

True, but the real question is why they didn't just pick the Republican Party a few days ago. They had a perfect opening after the President went on the attack against them. Instead, they reached back out to the Democratic Party just to keep this circus running. What's the point? Just to stage another political drama like we saw yesterday?

It feels like there are all these strange games being played behind closed doors, and honestly, we’ll probably never know what the real story is. It reminds me of how my old boss used to shuffle things around just to keep everyone guessing. Even now, Republican voters claim the Bridge party is just a way for the Democratic Party to steal their votes, while Democratic voters swear the Bridge party is actually working for the Republicans. We've just been spinning in circles for two months now.

Anthony Jackson2 said:In a way, it’s actually for the best—let them finish what they started back during the "saintly" Franjo era, so we can finally hit rock bottom and get it over with. We aren't exactly far off anyway.

Maybe if I actually looked at some objective data for myself instead of just repeating the same tired mantras that have been circling our heads for decades, I wouldn't feel like we started our downward spiral all the way back in the nineties.

As for Petrov, the guy really bit off more than he could chew. I truly believe he had good intentions when he jumped into this whole thing, but you simply cannot play games with those old, entrenched political structures. He basically sealed his own fate, along with the Bridge party and any other third party looking to make a move anytime soon.

Now, if Tomislav Karamarko really orchestrated everything the way it looks, the man is a better strategist than anyone in House of Cards. But regardless of how it goes, I doubt this Government will even make it through their full term.

Alex Brown50 said:So that’s the mindset—if you actually dare to notice that things aren't quite that simple, and that the West has its own massive blind spots—like a dirty conscience or all those weird connections to our ancient, primal enemies—then apparently you're just "justifying terrorism." 🙏

That's basically it: everyone just retreats into their little tribes and packs. We're the civilized ones, they're all animals; we're Republicans, they're Democrats; we're Cowboys, they're Outlaws. If you have anything else to contribute, you're a traitor. Honestly, the people acting like they'd be the first to build walls and "clean up" America would probably be the most hardcore extremists if they’d just been born into a different context. It's the same deal—the loudest "patriots" here would be the most radical zealots if they were part of a different group.

Someone mentioned how we Americans basically invented religion as this twisted ideological monster. Man, what a tragic and honestly pretty clueless take on history. We didn't invent it; we just polished it up and sanitized it—and at a pretty bloody cost, too. And now we act all shocked when folks in the rural heartland start heading down that same path, especially since they're dealing with the historical trauma that the West itself helped create.

Truly shocking and totally unexpected, right? Just imagine, ladies and gentlemen—such primitive behavior in the 21st century... yikes, we just can't wrap our heads around it. 🙏

Good grief. You’re standing there as a true humanist, calling out a massive injustice while everyone else is blinded by pure hatred. Most people are stuck seeing everything in black and white, unable to grasp the deeper nuances, but you actually see the bigger picture. You're like a modern-day Sophie Scholl. Unfortunately, reality isn't working in your favor right now. The vast majority of people are looking at this exactly how you are. Honestly, the West deserves what it's getting. It's just tragic how many miserable souls have lost their lives because of sheer stupidity. It’s gone so far that people are actually claiming the white man invented genocide. Talk about peak white guilt.

It’s a shame we can't seem to have a grounded, rational conversation about Islam and its actual teachings. Most people in this group are honestly fascinating—there’s such a wide spectrum of perspectives here. But when this topic comes up, it feels like talking to those self-proclaimed humanists who think they have all the answers. They immediately start pivoting. "But look at Christianity," or "Look at this historical event," or "All religions are essentially the same." They’ll claim Islam is just about love and peace, then turn around and call Americans narrow-minded for disagreeing. It’s always the same cycle. It gets exhausting.

Look, people are out here throwing stones at others. They literally bury someone in the sand and pelt them with rocks until they’re dead, all because of adultery or because they decided to leave Islam. They justify it by claiming the Creator of the universe commanded it. All over the world, Muslims believe this is God's word, so they give it their blessing. I’ll say it: you have to be a psychopath to do that. And whenever I speak up, people call me narrow-minded. It’s like I’m not allowed to call these acts sick without having to bring up the historical massacres committed by every single religion in history just to make my point. But that’s the reality—it is the official policy of certain Middle Eastern nations. Official policy. In those places, even trying to convert a Muslim can be treated as a criminal offense. Where are the global protests? Where are the massive demonstrations from the Muslim community around the world saying Saudi Arabia is wrong? Where are the voices saying, "This isn't actually Islam"? Nobody is stepping up to call these people psychopaths or labeling these punishments as insane. Honestly, if you’re stoning someone because you think a command from a thousand years ago still holds sway today, you’re a psychopath. At least in my book.

I’ll say it again. There are millions—hell, hundreds of millions—of Muslims out there who don't do that. They actually understand what the Quran represents. But honestly, they aren't even the main issue anymore. The real problem lies with the other HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of Muslims who take things literally. In places like parts of the Midwest, for instance, you see significant groups who believe every single word is literal divine command, even when it calls for stoning people. STONING. We need to stand behind the normal, moderate Muslims and give them the support they need to reform the religion from within. We’re never going to achieve that if we just pretend the problem doesn't exist.

What I’m trying to get at is that the reasons someone would go out and set off a bomb in a crowd of innocent people aren't simple. It’s never just one thing; there’s a whole chain of factors at play. I think we can all agree on that. But in my view, tucked right in the middle of all those reasons, you'll find religion. Honestly, I think the very things you see happening during these attacks make that point pretty clear.

Matthew Anderson4 said:cause = excuse?

Funny how the debate hasn't even moved past one of the causes, mostly because some group of pseudo-intellectuals decided that one single cause is somehow the only cause.

We’re really getting into whether Islamic teachings play a role in all of this. That’s the core of the debate—we're looking for the actual root cause. Now, I’m not saying this is the only factor at play. The world isn't that simple, and I know nobody here thinks it is. But I can't help but wonder if there’s a connection when you see someone shouting "Allahu Akbar" while they're causing chaos. Is there a link to the faith? In my view, beyond all the usual talking points about "evil Americans" or the systemic issues involving white people, there are other underlying causes we tend to ignore. We just don't talk about them because we're too afraid of being politically incorrect.

Anthony Jackson2 said:You're missing the point because your entire argument starts from a flawed premise. They didn't attack because of religion, they didn't attack because we're "infidels," and it's not some grand scheme to Islamize us (?). The attack wasn't about faith—it was driven by other factors that you, Emily Ward3, that wannabe comedian Ken, and the rest of you seem determined to ignore, which is exactly what this thread has been debating for three days now.
They use religious rhetoric because the people pulling their strings have brainwashed them into thinking there’s a reward waiting in paradise—but that isn't why the attack happened.

For three days now, you've been bashing Islam, yet you conveniently forget how many people have been slaughtered in the name of Christianity—and you also forget that "peaceful" Christians in this country have only managed to nearly wipe each other out twice in the last century.

Besides, when you start quoting the Old Testament—all those lovely verses about forgiveness and peace...🙄

No, Islam isn't inherently violent, just as Christianity or Buddhism aren't—even though millions have died in the name of all three. Why? Because there are enough corrupt people in this world to twist any belief system to serve their own petty interests. Attacking Islam is an insult to the millions of people who have lived peacefully in America for generations under that "violent" faith.

Personally, I don't think religion does anyone any good, but I can understand why some people need it. Still, seeing one religion like Christianity being placed on a pedestal above all others—it's honestly nauseating.

Here’s the situation. To be clear, Anthony Jackson2 didn't say that their belief in the Quran being the word of God was the cause. What he actually said was that their attacks weren't motivated by faith. He was arguing that there are plenty of other reasons behind this, none of which have anything to do with their religious convictions. Basically, religion just isn't one of them.

That’s exactly what I find so terrifying about the current state of things. We aren't allowed to call out bad ideas anymore if they happen to be tucked under the umbrella of faith. It’s become this untouchable shield. If someone actually believed that Florida shared a border with France, or that humans were born with three eyes, or that water wasn't made of hydrogen and oxygen—people would laugh. They’d demand actual evidence. If someone claimed two lions could somehow give birth to zebra cubs, you'd call it nonsense immediately. But when it's wrapped in religious conviction, the conversation changes entirely. You can't apply the same logic. We've lost the ability to demand proof for things that simply aren't true.

Religion is where that logic falls apart. Anyone can claim they believe in everything, and then we’re expected to just nod along. It’s become this repetitive mantra—that all religions are essentially the same. But I have to disagree. Take Jainism, for example. It’s one of the oldest faiths out there, built entirely on the foundation of meditation and absolute non-violence. You can’t exactly take their core teachings and twist them to justify aggression. Unless you’re lying through your teeth or losing your grip on reality, it’s just not possible. By those standards alone, Jainism stands as a superior faith compared to many others. We can draw these distinctions anywhere. Some belief systems hold much more progressive, modern views on certain issues, while remaining incredibly primitive regarding others. They aren't all cut from the same cloth.

What I'm trying to get at is that bombers have much more on their minds than just some malicious white guy pushing their buttons. It feels like we’re completely overlooking that part of the equation.

Anthony Jackson2 said:You're missing the point because your entire argument starts from a flawed premise. They didn't attack because of religion, they didn't attack because we're "infidels," and it's not some grand scheme to Islamize us (?). The attack wasn't about faith—it was driven by other factors that you, Emily Ward3, that wannabe comedian Ken, and the rest of you seem determined to ignore, which is exactly what this thread has been debating for three days now.
They use religious rhetoric because the people pulling their strings have brainwashed them into thinking there’s a reward waiting in paradise—but that isn't why the attack happened.

For three days now, you've been bashing Islam, yet you conveniently forget how many people have been slaughtered in the name of Christianity—and you also forget that "peaceful" Christians in this country have only managed to nearly wipe each other out twice in the last century.

Besides, when you start quoting the Old Testament—all those lovely verses about forgiveness and peace...🙄

No, Islam isn't inherently violent, just as Christianity or Buddhism aren't—even though millions have died in the name of all three. Why? Because there are enough corrupt people in this world to twist any belief system to serve their own petty interests. Attacking Islam is an insult to the millions of people who have lived peacefully in America for generations under that "violent" faith.

Personally, I don't think religion does anyone any good, but I can understand why some people need it. Still, seeing one religion like Christianity being placed on a pedestal above all others—it's honestly nauseating.

This right here is exactly what I mean. If you move from criticizing specific ideas within Islam to attacking its very foundations, it becomes nasty. It turns into an attack on people, and then you get that pathetic whining about how millions of people live peacefully.

Let's try a thought experiment. Imagine there were Catholic nations in the Middle East. Every single law was pulled straight from the Bible, other religions were banned, they shipped millions of Bibles across the globe, they had religious police, stoning, lashings, mutilations...

Now, let's say I live in Chicago and I call myself a Catholic. I go to church regularly and follow Biblical principles—though not necessarily to the letter. I take the parts about love to heart, but I recognize that some parts were written ages ago and don't really apply to the modern world. If I saw those things happening in those countries, I wouldn't claim to be a Catholic just because they are. I’d start my own reformed Catholic church to condemn those primitive laws. I would tell everyone that they are interpreting the Bible completely wrong.

But that doesn't happen with Muslims. Everyone condemns ISIS. But how many people actually condemn Saudi Arabia? Anyone who tries to reform Islam often faces execution or stoning. I'm telling you, the statistics are horrifying. There are massive groups of people who believe Sharia law is the divine mandate we must live by. There is a huge collection of outdated rules that make no sense in today's world, yet millions of people still cling to them literally. For them, the greatest honor is memorizing the Quran.

In America, there are very few people—if any—who take every single word of the Bible literally. Like the idea that God created the entire universe in seven days. But I fear there are far too many Muslims who take the Quran entirely literally.

I just wanted to point this out. I intentionally avoided talking about Christianity or the Bible here; I used other examples instead. I haven't once praised Christianity. We are discussing Islam and how much its teachings influence behavior. Yet, so many people immediately retreat into their shells, making jokes about the Crusades or historical genocides. Sure, we can talk about that, but it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Alex Brown50 said:No excuses—none at all. But there are causes, right? Between past baggage, current issues, genuine oppression, religious fanaticism, and politics... you can't just wipe the slate clean on history, and honestly, things aren't exactly getting better today. It was crosses and swords yesterday, and now it's missiles and drones.

Western civilization didn't just pop out of nowhere, either. It grew from a bunch of different sources, absorbed tons of other cultures, and let's be real—it definitely profited off other people's misery. It’s pretty naive to think exploitation just stopped because we cleaned up our own backyard and don't have to see the grit anymore. So, fine—let these "uncivilized" places deal with it on their own, as long as we don't have to hear about them (unless, you know, we need their oil or cheap labor).

As for the New Testament, you can't just take it at face value without oversimplifying everything. Back when those words were being written, the Old Testament wasn't even in the format we use today. And even if we could pinpoint exactly which part of the tradition Jesus was talking about regarding the Law, it still depends on which aspect of that tradition you mean. Plus, the New Testament itself is super diverse and open to so many interpretations—sometimes even contradicting itself... It's definitely not black and white.

Let me be clear. I’m not out here representing Christianity, nor do I want to. I don't care much about what's written in the Bible; it isn't my moral compass, and I certainly don't view it as some divine blueprint for the universe. But when you look at the contrast—like Jesus being this sort of hippie preaching on a hillside versus Muhammad acting as a military commander—the difference seems pretty stark to me.

James Anderson5 said:I read the Quran a long time ago, but quite thoroughly—not sure if you have? And since you mentioned it isn't a huge book (it's about 600 pages total), I have my doubts. You're talking about Sharia law, but much of that is actually based on the Hadiths—collections of traditions believed to be the sayings of Muhammad. The thing is, there's a lot of disagreement over whether he even said certain things. Plus, Sharia varies significantly between Sunnis and Shiites and changes from one country to the next...

The Quran itself doesn't mention stoning as a punishment for anything, though it does mention flogging for adultery, provided there were four witnesses who saw it happen. Obviously, that doesn't make the punishment okay. Stoning for adultery was actually something found in the Old Testament and Jewish tradition too. The reason we don't look at Christianity as a "crazy" religion is because of the spirit in which the Bible was written, especially the New Testament. It's the same deal with the Quran; for instance, the Sufis are supposed to embody its true spirit...

Just as Western civilization rejected all those extreme practices, Middle Eastern cultures should ideally do the same. Luckily, the West had the benefit of developing a philosophical foundation that gave us enough distance from pure religious dogma...

Ultimately, the key today lies in education and economic stability. But it's not always a given, because even a place like Saudi Arabia publicly executes dozens of people every year. To be honest, many parts of that region didn't have centuries of cultural, scientific, or philosophical development; until recently, they were mostly dealing with primitive tribal structures. Just look at the groups American oil companies had to negotiate with when they first started drilling. That's why trying to force democracy onto those nations felt so unrealistic—many weren't ready for it, much like how it wouldn't necessarily work in China either...

When I said the Bible wasn't a large book, I meant in terms of scale. And if I haven't read it cover-to-cover, I won't pretend I have. If you have, fair enough. There are beautiful passages in the Quran, truly. But there are also sections that point very clearly toward the path Muhammad took, and the path one must follow to reach paradise.

But hey, we agree on this: you called those practices insane, and that’s exactly what I’m saying. Those laws might have made sense a thousand years ago, but today, they are unacceptable. And while millions of Muslims likely feel the same way, the problem is the millions who don't—the ones who take these things literally. I fear that number is much larger than the group that rejects them. I base that on what I see in Middle Eastern nations and the perspectives expressed by Muslims living in Europe regarding the practices back home.

Just as we rejected those radical practices and moved beyond religious extremism, Muslims need to do the same. On that point, we are in total agreement.

Anthony Jackson2 said:The media wants us to look at these politicians—as if staring at them actually changes anything. It’s all just a performance for the cameras.

Nobody's out here asking for justifications regarding something like this—honestly, I don't know why it even needs to be mentioned, let alone debated. It’s just a pointless conversation.

I think we’re all mature enough now to actually talk about what caused this—without the theatrics. The root issues go way deeper than just religion, and that should be obvious to anyone who does more than glance at a headline once a week—or even those who've been paying actual attention to how this attack unfolded.

As for the whole religion debate—I only jumped in because I felt physically sick reading someone claim you have to distance yourself from Christian teachings just to justify killing. Apparently, they forgot that history spans a bit longer than twenty years.

I said what I said, and I'm fully aware of the implications, but I honestly think you're mistaken. Like I mentioned earlier, there's a fundamental difference between Jesus and Muhammad regarding how they perceive the world.

That being said, I'm intentionally stepping away from discussing Jesus right now to focus on much simpler examples. I'm bringing this up because people keep accusing me of glorifying Christianity. Look, we can talk about Christianity if you want. We really can. But right now, the conversation here is about Islam.

James Anderson5 said:Why would I mix up apples and oranges? It’s obvious that all dissidents were under surveillance during the old era, but it's also clear that most extremism in history stems from economic instability, lack of education, and human rights violations—not religion. Religion is just there to give a psychopath some kind of justification for what they want to do...

Neither Buddhism, Islam, nor Christianity are inherently violent, yet you'll find followers of all those faiths who have done all sorts of terrible things throughout history...

In its best form, Islam simply enriched Western history and culture, from the Alhambra to the palaces of Sicily, contributing everything from science to literature; but in its worst form today, it poses a threat to physical security...

It would be like claiming a psychopath only acted out because the state of the country gave him some sort of "justification" for his intentions. That’s just not how it works. There are very clear, undeniable reasons why he did what he did. It's the same logic as why a group of people would decide to scatter in different directions the moment a bomb goes off in a crowded area. The motives are right there if you actually look at them.

People claim Islam isn't violent? Look, the Quran isn't exactly a massive tome. You can fly through it pretty quickly. I’d actually suggest you sit down and read it for yourself. Once you get into it, you'll see that message of peace and love firsthand.

If you’re claiming it isn't violent, then how exactly do you account for the legal systems in various Middle Eastern nations? I'm talking about things like public lashings or stoning. Is it really possible that every single one of them is just fundamentally misinterpreting the text? It seems hard to believe such a massive, widespread misunderstanding would happen everywhere at once.

Jessica Gonzalez said:I guess I find all this sudden support for France a little bit unsettling. Did YouTube change its colors to match the Pakistani flag when bombs were falling there? Did they paint the opera houses in Sydney in the colors of Iraq whenever dozens of people were dying in Baghdad? I suppose people are people, but it feels like the world doesn't view everyone with the same level of empathy. Innocent people in Paris have suffered a tragedy that nobody deserves, but I worry these things happen because certain lives seem more valued than others. It all feels quite absurd—so much so that Wikipedia has entire pages listing incidents in Iraq, almost like it’s a list of Arsenal match results or a rundown of Big Brother winners.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror...n_Iraq_in_2015
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terror...n_Iraq_in_2014

Looking back after a few years, maybe I'm starting to see things more clearly. It seems like what happened in America hundreds of years ago, or across Africa over the last few centuries, is being repeated in the Middle East. It feels like a pattern of Western interventionism... It's sad that innocent people end up losing their lives at concerts because of someone else's mistakes.

Jessica Gonzalez said:So, look at it this way—those African nations end up paying tribute to local warlords, while those same elites probably have a GDP per capita around $40,000. They live easy lives, going to concerts and ballgames, and then act totally surprised when people in the "provinces" start revolting. It seems like there's this massive disconnect with people in the West; I suppose their biggest concerns are whether the local Starbucks has free Wi-Fi or the exact carbon footprint of a McDonald's burger. Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, people aren't even sure if they'll make it through the night.

I don't think anyone was particularly losing sleep back when the Siege of Ottawa was happening, either...

Nobody ever told you that you couldn't feel sorrow or grief for all those tragedies. What you’re doing now—claiming that showing sympathy for people in France makes someone a hypocrite—that’s where you lose me. I’m honestly at a loss for words. It’s the same pattern we saw after the Charlie Hebdo shooting, where people immediately start hunting for excuses. "Innocent people die at concerts because of some stupidity." Seriously? What kind of "stupidity" are we talking about here? The people who opened fire were simply reacting to an immense injustice being forced upon them. Where are the suicide bombers from Ecuador? Or India? There are so many countries that have been dealt massive injustices, both in the past and still today. How can these "provinces" just sit there and ignore it? So, what you're actually saying is that his rage is understandable. You might not personally kill people that way, but you think his actions can be understood or even justified by some bad white guy?

What really strikes me is how everyone just refuses to look at the root cause. There’s this total avoidance of responsibility when it comes to analyzing the religious ideologies driving these suicide bombers. It's frustrating. These people aren't subtle about it; they state exactly what they think of us and lay out their intentions quite clearly—what they want to do and what they would achieve if they actually had the chance. I can't help but feel that the current situation is being handled differently because France is playing a much more cautious game with its trade quotas and international relations. 🙏.

Such shocking indifference? Seriously, what exactly is the "correct" way to act according to you? Should we just sit around weeping daily over every tragedy on the planet? It sounds lovely in theory. We’re all human, we’re all connected. But what does that actually look like in practice? How exactly would this supposed apathy be any less jarring?

Jessica Gonzalez said:The U.S. and Europe moved past those old eras, which is why powers like Great Britain eventually dominated much of the globe (alongside France, Spain, and others exporting peace and democracy). And I suppose we shouldn't forget how German Christians, who were leading industrial and cultural forces for ages, took that sense of superiority one step too far and caused tens of millions of deaths in just a few years. That's about it for revolutions and progress.

The Germans can hold their own against other European nations when it comes to culture, philosophy, and industry. But again, I have to ask. If white people are inherently so evil, why don't people from other religions or different countries just target their colonizers and drop bombs on them?

And you can't have it both ways. If the West had a moral obligation to prevent things like the atrocities in the North America or Uganda, they should have first helped the people living under the thumb of psychopaths like Saddam or Gaddafi. Do we have a moral obligation to help North Koreans who are literally starving to death while a bloated sociopath rules over them?

Of course, Americans and Europeans aren't fighting wars solely for humanitarian reasons. Their own interests are always the priority. But if you're going to claim they had an obligation to intervene in one place, they had an obligation to intervene in another.

William Gomez5 said:To claim Buddhists are some non-violent, peaceful crowd while ignoring everything they're pulling in places like Myanmar? That’s just straight-up delusion. It's total madness.

Fair enough. Then please, show me a single verse where Buddha actually advocates for violence. Show me where he calls for the kind of actions we see happening there. Or look at Taoism. Or Jainism. Even Jesus. Where are the verses calling for bloodshed? Because you find plenty of those in the Quran.

I'll say it again. Anyone can twist words to fit their own agenda. But to take the teachings of Jesus, Buddha, or Lao Tzu and leap all the way to decapitation... well, that requires a massive stretch of the imagination.

ruggedjackal46 said:So, the Crusaders were "fake" Christians, while these guys are the "real" Muslims? What exactly are you basing that conclusion on? And why on earth do you assume that material interests aren't also lurking beneath the surface of this current chaos?

To me, trying to justify violence by waving around some two-thousand-year-old book is either pure insanity or blatant manipulation.

You call it insanity. Here in the States, it feels that way because we don't have a religious stranglehold on our institutions. You can be a believer—honestly, most people here are—but the government stays separate from it. The church might offer some comfort or hope, sure, but in any meaningful civic sense, its influence is dead. Even in modern Europe, you won't find a significant chunk of the population that takes holy scripture as literal, daily instruction.

But things are different in the Middle East. Groups like ISIS are incredibly blunt about their views; they aren't hiding their agenda. The problem is that we refuse to believe them. We insist on calling them "sick" or claiming they have nothing to do with Islam just to make ourselves feel better.

Let me repeat myself. There are 1.6 billion Muslims globally. If you look at surveys conducted in supposedly "moderate" or free nations, the data tells a story. For instance, about 24% of Muslims in a country like Albania view Sharia as divine law handed down by the Creator. In places like Canada, that number jumps to 52%, and in Pakistan, it’s a staggering 80%. And remember, Albania and Canada are European. How are we supposed to coexist with people who genuinely believe a set of primitive, psychopathic, and twisted rules is God's will? It might work for a while, but eventually, it's going to escalate. I simply cannot wrap my head around those views, nor can I accept them. To them, my views are the ones that are incomprehensible.

That's just one symptom of a much larger issue. When you ask these groups about the punishment for leaving the faith, or their views on women and LGBTQ+ rights, you see a massive amount of regression and primitivism. Just look at the backlash following those controversial cartoons in Denmark. It's constant. We end up living in a state of perpetual fear, afraid to even joke about or criticize ideas that we find deeply disturbing.

Look, you can interpret any book however you want. I could kill fifty people and claim I found the inspiration in *Harry Potter*. But there are objective verses in the Quran that you just don't find in, say, Taoism. If you lived strictly by the word of the Quran versus living strictly by the teachings of Buddha, the outcomes would be worlds apart. The Quran is filled with regressive, dangerous ideas that are fundamentally incompatible with our American values.

Alright, everyone. But honestly, dismissing Islam or treating the core tenets found in the Quran as some sort of direct threat to our way of life strikes me as pure madness. ISIS makes their stances and beliefs crystal clear. They aren't hiding why they do what they do. Yet, we play dumb. We act like religion doesn't even factor into their motivations, assuming it's irrelevant to them just because it feels irrelevant to us. We try to write them off as nothing more than psychopaths who have zero connection to their faith.

The reality is, there are people out there who truly believe the Quran is the literal word of the Creator of the universe. They don't just follow it; they believe it with every fiber of their being. And frankly, it's hard to find common ground with people like that. To them, our secular ideas are dangerous—they see our values as a path toward eternal damnation for themselves and their children. Meanwhile, to us, their doctrines feel completely unacceptable, primitive, and unimaginably cruel.

Religions are massive collections of diverse ideas. Some branches are filled with progressive, peaceful concepts, while others are steeped in primitive, outdated, and outright malicious ones.

Look, I’m not saying Islam is the sole issue here. And I’m certainly not suggesting that Americans or the West aren't responsible for a huge chunk of what’s going on. Honestly, we bear a lot of the blame. But pinning the entire weight of this on the U.S.—claiming everything is strictly our fault—just feels wrong to me. It’s an incomplete argument. It reminds me of how people reacted after the Charlie Hebdo shooting; there was no room for apologies then, either. There isn't one here. Not the old treaties with former colonies, not the depictions of prophets, not any military intervention anywhere in the world. None of it justifies this. There simply is no excuse.

The liberal doctrine tries to convince us that all religions are essentially the same—that there’s no meaningful distinction between them. It suggests that people are the only variable, the only source of friction. They claim that if those folks in Paris hadn't turned to Islam, they would have simply found another ideology to latch onto. They paint them as sick individuals who somehow misinterpreted the Quran. People love to quote that one verse stating that killing one person is equivalent to killing all of humanity. Truly beautiful. Just lovely.

But we’re clearly glossing over hundreds of other passages—not that I have the energy to write them all out right now—that call for things proving just how primitive, regressive, and dangerous this religion actually is. ISIS's interpretation of the Quran isn't any less valid than that of the so-called "moderate and normal" Muslims. In fact, I’d argue the opposite. ISIS follows Muhammad much more consistently and faithfully than Muslims living in the West. Muhammad was a military commander who expanded his faith through warfare. You can see the results by looking at Middle Eastern nations; it’s pure savagery. Saudi Arabia is basically a medieval, primitive state operating under laws they believe were handed to Muhammad by the creator of the universe. And we’re expected to pretend that’s fine. It isn't. It is fundamentally incompatible with our American values of freedom, equality, and liberalism.

Let's run the math. Even if only one percent of Muslims are radicals, and assuming there are a billion Muslims—though it's likely double that—you're still looking at ten million absolute lunatics. Unfortunately, that number is significantly higher, which becomes obvious whenever you look at global polls asking Muslims about Sharia law or depictions of their prophet.

It doesn't matter if you study the Tao Te Ching or the Buddha; you won't end up like this. There are no interpretations of Jainism where followers become bloodthirsty fanatics fighting non-believers in the name of their faith. They simply don't exist. Not all religions are the same. Yet, we are told we must protect and respect the ideas propagated in the Quran. It's madness. That's what this whole situation has devolved into.

Ever since the Charlie Hebdo tragedy, the narrative has shifted to saying people shouldn't have drawn those images. Now, people are already starting to deflect by asking why we aren't focusing on the children in Yemen instead. Honestly, what kind of masochism is that?

And here is the ultimate logical gymnastics move: If Americans are supposedly to blame for everything, if we are responsible for the fall of "stable" regimes, and if Middle Eastern people truly require bloodthirsty dictators and murderers to rule them just to keep groups like ISIS in check... then what does that actually say about the people living there and the religion they follow?

I honestly don't know how much brainwashing has taken place over here. If you were to ask almost anyone in my neck of the woods who’s responsible for this mess, they’d point their finger straight at Americans. You see these endless deep dives on Facebook already, just like what happened after the Charlie Hebdo shooting. There's this widespread sentiment that none of this would even be happening if it weren't for the U.S., and that they basically cooked up the whole situation. It's a very common view.

What I have noticed, though, is how the Muslim community is reacting to this. Over on Twitter, the hashtags are flying, imams and muftis are expressing their shock, and there are all these calls to fight against evil... which is fine, really. But let's look back at the reaction to those Danish cartoons. People were burning flags, hundreds of thousands of people were out in the streets... total chaos. Now, just imagine if someone were to burn a Quran on national television or something similar. In a best-case scenario, that person would probably have to spend the rest of their life in hiding.

James Anderson5 said:On one hand, you’re saying Islam and Christianity aren't the same thing, but then you turn around and argue that America doesn't really care about Christianity anymore because we've moved past it and religion just doesn't matter much today...

I think you might have lost your train of thought there. If you're using modern American society as proof of the divide between Islam and Christianity, then you're contradicting yourself—since you also claim that society has moved past its Christian roots entirely...

That isn't what I meant at all. One point I'm making is that America isn't tolerant today because of Christian values. It's tolerant because religion has faded from the driver's seat. It's become secondary. We stopped letting faith dictate our civic decisions. We took control of our own destiny.

My second point is this: certain religions, or specific religious dogmas, can actually be compatible with the American way of thinking, where respecting different viewpoints and behaviors is a core value. Jesus calls for turning the other cheek and forgiving sinners. He’s the one who holds judgment. If someone truly believes he was God and lives by that, they can exist relatively peacefully in the US today. Of course, there are friction points. But if they stick strictly to the New Testament—which doesn't explicitly address things like IVF or contraception—they can coexist with the majority of Americans without much trouble. Issues arise when people interpret texts in wildly different ways, but even then, if fundamentalists simply follow the New Testament, it wouldn't be such a massive clash. When it comes to morality, self-reflection, and helping others, the New Testament carries messages that were incredibly progressive for its time. It's quite similar to Buddhism or Jainism and other faiths that preach non-violence.

But Islam isn't built that way. Extremists will tell you themselves that they are following Allah. They genuinely, deeply believe in the literal dictates of the Quran. Modern liberals tend to turn a blind eye to this, dismissing them as mere fanatics who would be considered extremists anywhere else. The lifestyle found in Saudi Arabia, for instance, is fundamentally incompatible with life in America. A person living strictly by the Quran and a secular American cannot live together indefinitely without conflict. It’s just impossible. To me, the idea that stoning someone to death is a valid punishment for leaving their faith is an incomprehensible atrocity. Just as he might view me as a sinner whose ideas could lead his children to hell.

Anyway, we can take this to the appropriate sub-forum. This isn't the place for it.

James Anderson5 said:Tell me, have you actually read the Quran or studied Muhammad's life? I think that’s the first step, because if you had read it (which I believe any American intellectual should do), you wouldn't be making these claims. It’s the same with the Bible, which even in the New Testament mentions violence—if you look at the context, just like you should with the Quran. Think about Jesus flipping tables in the temple, or Peter using a sword to cut off an ear during Jesus' arrest. If your use of the Quran or the Bible just boils down to quoting random snippets you found online, then there isn't much point in discussing this. The history and development of both Christianity and Islam are deep, complex subjects, not just instant wisdom for daily consumption.

Regarding that "cowardly" label being thrown at Syrians for not fighting for their own land... well, we've seen intense political engineering back in the States too, if you recall the political assassinations during certain eras. What do you think the CIA does in places like Syria when we've done similar things to ourselves? Of course, they manufacture chaos in those nations, making it so a normal person doesn't even know who to fight for; they are incredibly good at that. If anyone had wanted to, they could have done that to us years ago, but unlike their policy toward Syria, the goal here was to maintain stability in this part of the world. Small countries are really just pawns in the hands of major powers...

And here's another parallel: are all those people leaving the US to work abroad considered economic migrants, or are they just cowards who didn't want to stay and build their own country, even for minimum wage?

To be clear, I'm not saying America should take in hundreds of thousands of refugees from god-knows-where, since that carries its own risks (just look at my post regarding why places like Qatar or Oman don't take them in), but we still need to show a level of humanity and understanding, alongside a healthy dose of caution...

Flipping Tables😂

That’s a pretty extreme example of violence. But honestly, it’s beside the point. Instead of comparing Islam to Christianity, we should be comparing Islamic beliefs to modern, secular America. That was my actual point. I don't care how many times tables were flipped in the New Testament. I don't think God descended to Earth to inspire people to write those specific scenes, and most Americans today don't feel that way either. We’ve moved past that. Religion isn't the factor here.

On the other hand, we see countries that follow the Quran very strictly. To me, those societies come across as violent, backward, and primitive. Anyone who can't see that, or tries to convince me that America is exactly the same because Christianity and Islam are essentially identical, is just closing their eyes to reality. Or they're basically treating us like the extremists over in Saudi Arabia.

Anthony Jackson2 said:During our own civil war, Wikipedia says 20,000 people were killed, and that ended only 20 years ago. Can we really say that was "normal" for us, or did people still find it horrifying?

Millions died in Europe during WW2. Was death considered "normal" then? Is it considered normal in Europe today because of it?

No sane person thinks murder is normal. If you think it is, you're the problem.

commie ☕

They are all compatible with the "European" way of life. Honestly, you talk like Europe hasn't seen Islam before—there are 50 million Muslims living perfectly fine in Europe today. It’s not about faith; it’s about social development and adopting certain societal norms. You act like Christian history was nothing but honey and milk. My ass. Stoning, burning, killing dissenters, sending children to their deaths, millions dead in conquest wars... Church history is largely soaked in blood, mostly innocent blood, yet it doesn't threaten peace today because it adapted to the norms society forced upon it. That's what will happen with Muslims coming to Europe. You have to separate mainstream Islam from extremism, just like with any other religion. Most Muslims have nothing to do with extremism. Those who do are simply broken individuals who would find a reason to be violent regardless of their faith. They'll always find an excuse.

This is precisely that liberal dogma that I think has taken such deep root that it will eventually cost us dearly. Christian America has gone through its catharsis and Enlightenment. It realized the madness and monstrosity of its past actions. And most importantly, it moved away from them. We don't live in a religious state today. Nowhere in the Constitution are God's laws or His word mentioned. Anyone can go to church, but their lifestyle doesn't differ at all from that of an atheist. We have morality, a state, and a life that isn't tied to religion. Achieving this took us centuries of bloody wars and conflicts.

But what I want to say—and what people in America are afraid to say today—is that Islam is inherently dangerous to us at its core. Muhammad wasn't Jesus or Buddha. He was a commander, a general, and a warrior who spread his faith and mission through war and killing. ISIS actually adheres most strictly to the prophet's words. Of course, there are plenty of Muslims who are disgusted by what they do. But a huge number of those people don't think Saudi Arabia is run in a sick way. They don't think stoning is unacceptable under certain conditions. They believe that if I mock the prophet, I deserve a drastic punishment. You cannot impose a social norm on that kind of thinking. You can't force them to be compatible with mine. It is simply impossible. And it will lead to conflict.

There is a reason why we don't see radical Jainists leading wars and killing people. Islam has a few places where we can say it carries a message of peace. But that is nothing compared to the numerous other parts where it is cited as a primitive and backward religion. And the people who believe in that—who truly believe God told the prophet those things, who think it is the word of God, who believe it must never be touched, mentioned, or criticized—those people are dangerous. Regardless of whether they declare themselves or others as moderate and normal.

Matthew Anderson4 said:America is full of people who think eternal hellfire is a fair punishment for anything.

Most of us have probably seen that Humans of New York page. Just look up the photos from back when that guy was hanging out with Syrian refugees.

It’s not accurate. Sure, someone might claim to be a believer, but their actions often tell a completely different story. They do things that just don't align with the core tenets of their faith. Honestly, you rarely see truly steadfast believers who actually live by the New Testament in its entirety.

Even if they did follow everything to the letter, it wouldn't change much. If you look at Jesus, he was basically the ultimate hippie on a hill. You can't even put Buddha or Muhammad in the same sentence as him because their actual messages are worlds apart. There's a massive distinction between believing someone might face hell for marrying a man versus the idea of us taking the law into our own hands to stone them for it.

Europe exists as it does because religion just doesn't play a role anymore. It’s become irrelevant in almost everything, except maybe as a way to find some comfort or solace. In every other sense, we are completely secular nations. Anyone—especially those following Islam—who can't or won't accept that really shouldn't be here. At its core, Islam is incompatible with our values, like freedom of speech, religious liberty, and LGBTQ+ rights. Muhammad was a military leader and a general who spread his faith through violence. What ISIS does today isn't fundamentally different from that.

It’s just that liberalism has been pushed to such an absurd extreme that you aren't even allowed to point out that, while all religions in Europe are largely irrelevant today, some are clearly better than others. There are faiths that align with the lifestyle and mindset that Europe has built, and then there are those that don't. And Islam isn't one of them.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of good, kind, and noble people among Muslims. But anyone who thinks, say, Saudi Arabia is a well-ordered society just because it's based on the Prophet's laws—if they believe stoning is an acceptable punishment or similar nonsense—they have no place in Europe.

Larry Fox5 said:I don't know about that. "Civilized" can just be code for fake, staged, or some theatrical nonsense.
That celebration in Knickerbocker was exactly what people expected—raw and unapologetic.

None of that was happening in the city. Not even close.

Kudos to Matthew Anderson4, really. I’ll say, though, I’m not so sure about the Coen brothers lately—it feels like their quality has taken a bit of a dip if you ask me. And honestly, I don't think Paul Thomas Anderson has any trouble finding the backing he needs for his projects. Other than that, I'm totally on board with everything else.