Randman's call for nonSecular education...

So you would argue Wahhabism is very tolerant, but Jerry Falwell is in the same vein as Stalin or something, eh?The fact Wahhabism is so oppressive as to force women not to even show their faith in public, drive a car, etc,....or that people can be beheaded for merely carrying a Bible, as a tolerant religion.Keep in mind, Saudi Arabia is at the root and heart of Islam, and arguably practices Islam in a manner most free from Christian or other religious influences.

Also, the single most strongest force in destroying cultures around the world is secularism combined with globalism, commercialism and materialism. Most cultures are rooted in their religion, and be denigrating all religion, as secularism does, and marginalizing it, the effect especially combined with consumerism and secular education is flat out causing a rapid collapse of ancient cultures.

Please try reading what people post and for once, responding to what someone really says instead of wandering off into your willfully ingnorant rendition of what has been said.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You have expressed that belief on numerous occasions. So far you have shown no evidence that secularism denigrates religion.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Is Wahhabism not a form of Islam. You claim Christianity is the most violent and destructive force on the planet, and that Islam is tolerant.How is Christianity more violent and destructive than Wahabbism?This message has been edited by randman, 11-15-2005 02:06 AM

Please read, if you can, what I have posted in its entirety. Do not try your usual tactics of quotemining my comments, rephrasing what I have said or playing moving definitions.The record is here for all to read.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

did you know that when the christians won the first crusade, they slaughtered every muslim in jerusalem? that's pretty violent.did you know that when the christians lost the second crusade, saladin let the christians leave in peace? originally, he wanted to kill them all with the same bloodlust they had dealt out. but he didn't.once we stop talking about the crusades, we can go on to the spanish inquisition.

---

אָרַח

That still doesn't come close to other slaughers and genocide.I am against the perversion of Catholicism with it's persecution, as much as anyone, but it's not the "most violent" force in the world and never has been.It is truly bad because it perverts the name of Christ, but it's not the most violent force or worst genocide, etc,...not by a long shot.

i'm sorry, do a little more research on the crusades. it was QUITE the slaughter. ok, so. joshua leads the israelites into the holy land, and kills 7 entire nations. rome conquers and controlls much of europe under the christian standards and shields. hitler does the same. the crusaders slaughter millions of arabs and jews. the spanish inquisition exterminates tons of its own followers deemed heretics. i dunno how much moro violent we can get here.what do you propose as the most violent force in the world? yes, i agree. it's a damned shame.

---

אָרַח

Historically, the communist slaughters were the worse, followed by invaders of various stripes. The fact some Judeo-Christian invaders slaughtered some towns and people does not make it worse than, say, the Rwandan massacre.communism
ethnic genocide
plain old plunder and greed from invadersThose are how I would rank them.

yes, in sheer numbers alone.stalin slaughtered about 12 millions russians. hitler slaughtered 11 million europeans -- they're pretty close to comparable. now lump the countless millions of the crusades and the inquisition.i would say, with a second thought, that the genocides of the christian tradition not only outweigh all other genocides, but that if you added all others up, christianity would still win.

---

אָרַח

Stalin slaughtered much more than 12 million Soviets. That's absurdly low.But if you want to believe a lie, that's your choice. The fact of the matter is the Inquisition probably doesn't even compare to the Armenian genocide or Rwanda.For example, the death toll range of estimates for the Spanish Inquisition are: Spanish Inquisition - WikipediaIt appears more somewhere between several thousand and a 100 thousand, something like that.More than 2 million people were killed in the Rwandan massacres alone. Stalin killed somewhere between 60-110 million people. Mao killed more if you count the numbers that starved due to his insanity.The Inquisition doesn't even match Ghengis Khan, the Vikings, the Huns, etc,...This message has been edited by randman, 11-15-2005 02:56 AM

you really like to take one little part of what people say, don't you?how many died in the crusades? wanna find me a number for that? i mean, christians, jews, and muslims. every place i've ever seen it listed, it falls between 12 and 13 million. mao has a good deal more, yes.but i still think you'll find the crusades far outweigh mao. you don't wage war for 200 years and not kill a whole lot of people.

---

אָרַח

It isn’t one or the other. The history of the continent of America is an area that has become dominated by Christianity in all its forms (don’t for get them many catholic Hispanics and the like.) But the influence of many other religions is just as deeply inter-linked and fundamental in the nation’s formation. You can’t ignore the huge financial and political power that the Jewish community held and still hold. Asian religions and more lend their voice in the voices of migrant workers. Don’t forget the European religions (versions of Christianity) that persecuted the founding fathers causing them to seek a better life.And which version of Christianity would you want to teach? Out of the entire collection if different versions, which is most worthy of state indoctrination? Protestant, Catholic, JW’s, LDS, Creationism? Which?Anyway you cut it; to suggest you only need to teach a specific Christian viewpoint to teach young Americans the depth and breadth of the history of the land is avoiding the true depth and richness in America’s theological heritage.If you were Muslim, would you still insist that Christianity is the key to teaching American history? Somehow I doubt it.

What a laugher..even though your numbers are utter crap, let's just look at your argument...that Xians have murdered millions of people but a few million less than communism, Xianity is therefore moral????
Wow, you have low moral standards. So if Jesus had killed 1 bilion people with lightening and magical farts, and mao killed 1 billion and 1 people with guns, Jesus would be a great guy and mao evil...nice to see where you stand on morality.Oh, and another thing, the various communists, atheists, secularists (that you all lump into one definition proving again that you have the brain capacity of a macaque), were all different groups with different interests, different politics, and different support. The Xians did their murdering all for Xianity...you fundie guys are serial genocidal killers.Also, your complaints about materialism and secularism...what programs that are non-materialistic and not devised to increase the material wealth (of a select few) has the Xian dominated Bush admin proposed? I thought Jesus fed the poor? Bush and the Reps propose cuts to all programs that benefit the poor...and forget about turning the other cheek..unless it is to position yourself better to kill the guy who slapped you I think the idea of teaching religion in school should be dumped and have public schools teach ethics, logic, and the principles of methodological naturalism and let people get their religion at home or in their churches. Then maybe American students would learn to think, write, spell, understand science, and have a grasp of history that at least minimally approaches the levels in other Western countries. Otherwise, we will end up with a country of people as poorly informed as randman....on the average, we already well on our way to such a sad fate.This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 11-15-2005 05:10 AM