Trad Chick wants to kick arse
#91
(04-11-2011, 12:32 AM)TeaGuyTom Wrote: I don't know about her, but I wouldn't waste my money on buying a Koran to burn. As a Catholic, I'd rather buy something more useful to my faith that will last,  not Mohammed's false Gospel. Plus, in the words of the one thread about Beck, "This woman has me crapping my pants." She is spooky. You aren't kidding I wouldn't marry her. I would be scared that during my sleep, she would steal my testosterone to make the balls she somehow grew even bigger. She makes Steven Seagal look like a panty waist.

Well indeed. If I were to make a veil and name it after her, I'd finish it off with a loopy fringe.  :laughing:
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#92
(04-10-2011, 08:51 PM)dymphna17 Wrote:
(04-10-2011, 08:17 PM)Jacafamala Wrote:
(04-10-2011, 08:06 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: I wouldn't burn a Koran because it doesn't accomplish what I want to accomplish: suppression of false religions and conversions to the faith.

She's making a political statement, not a religious one.  In this context, it's appropriate, although I wouldn't say it's prudent.

It gets confused specifically because of what she said: it's not a religion anymore as much as a totalitarian manifesto that abuses Christians, women, etc.  Islam has pretty much morphed from a false religion to a tool of tyrannical dictators.  Not everywhere, of course.  There are still "noble" Muslims that are religious, try to follow the rules, don't want to kill non-believers at the drop of a hat, etc., but they're not the ones running the show.

The Koran has become political propaganda both by Islamic dictators and the American politicians.  She was burning it for the purpose of saying to politicans, "I have a right to do this."

As a religious statement it's a bad idea; as a political one, it's appropriate but I would argue imprudent.  The problem that comes from this is she, and her viewers, mix the two as is the wont of the totalitarian Islamists.  She makes a political speech and then criticizes the religious text.  Bad idea.  The Church burned books in areas they controlled for the purpose of stopping them from spreading; the Church didn't burn books as a statement.  It was utilitarian.  Burning books as a political statement is Protestant in origin.

Burn it, if you want, but burn it as a statement of free speech, not as a religious statement, and definitely don't mix them.  Clarity in statements is important for two reasons: 1) people understand you, 2) your enemies can't twist things as easily.

I applaud her for standing up what is right, for standing up for rights, for standing against a false religion.  But the methods she chose probably aren't the best.  If she took the burning out, I'd give her 5 stars plus a big X on her cheek and an O around her neck for calling Neo-Con Graham a jackass.  As it is, it's good political entertainment just like listening to Savage - it will fire up the existing base; it won't do much else.  Even if the leftists agree with her on the free speech, they're not going to admit she's right.  They'll call her a hater for burning the Koran and then go to the art show with Mary sculpted in elephant dung.  You know, business as usual.

The segment of Islam she's standing up against has no distinction between religion and politics... In fact they happily use their religion for their own political agenda. It happens in every
Islamic society. Every one of them...

And as for the US politicians she's calling out, I really don't think they care. She's not going to make anyone cry. Because if it gets any attention at all, the media will make her out to be a fool.

Maybe if more people stood up against the bs, they would listen.  Sometimes you need to stand up, even if you start alone.  We need some guts in this country before they start handing out no go lands for sharia like they have in England and France.  It's going to happen if no one stands up.  You don't agree with the way she did it.  Ok, how would you do it?

As my priest said in a sermon a few months back, nothing-nothing-is going to work until the Christians turn to God and repent. If the Catholic nations will turn to God, Muslims wouldn't stand a chance, as history has shown.

So, I figure, raise Christian children. Help teach Sunday school. What are you doing, Dymphna?
Oh my Jesus, I surrender myself to you. Take care of everything.--Fr Dolindo Ruotolo

Persevere..Eucharist, Holy Rosary, Brown Scapular, Confession. You will win.
Reply
#93
Teaguy
u donr need to buy a Koran to burn it. They are availible free from mutiple sources. The mphamadan student u ions on campuses give then our for free. Ect ect
they. Rather easy enough pieces od trash to find
jus a heads up
What r u doing jacafamal?

Reply
#94
I would give her more credit if she had been outspoken against Jewry and burned a Talmud instead.

That would be interesting to see.
Reply
#95
What an extraordinary creature.
I love America!
Reply
#96
Your credit would be empty vetus my friend
when's th last time u burned a Talmud?
That's what it's about right?
No ones stopping anyone burning Talmud and posting vids.
Go for it lad
sip
Reply
#97
(04-11-2011, 09:34 AM)devotedknuckles Wrote: Your credit would be empty vetus my friend
when's th last time u burned a Talmud?
That's what it's about right?
No ones stopping anyone burning Talmud and posting vids.
Go for it lad

Of course I haven't burned a Talmud. But then again, I never burned a Qur'an either.

Burning books like that to make a statement is a bit ridiculous. But you're missing the point: given the renowned political and social context of the US, I'd give this woman more credit if she had burned a Talmud. Jews have much more power and respectability in America than Muslims can ever dream of achieving.

You see, most Americans dislike Muslims to begin with, so burning a Qur'an is no big deal. Many can sympathise with her, especially conservative people. But if she had upset the Jewish powers instead, then it would be something. She would be condemned from all sides.
Reply
#98
I think the chick's point about burning Bibles and Christian symbols not being the same as murder is problematic. She didn't account for Host desecration, which is at least as outrageous to us as burning a Quran is to Muslims. Now that's an act of violence, in my understanding, though to non-Catholics it would be seen as an overreaction or just ridiculous.
Reply
#99
Ok Vetus.
I didn't  miss your point
you have missed this chicks point.
Anyway we won't agree here but we don't  have to,  so it's all good
Reply
(04-10-2011, 08:06 PM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: I wouldn't burn a Koran because it doesn't accomplish what I want to accomplish: suppression of false religions and conversions to the faith.

She's making a political statement, not a religious one.  In this context, it's appropriate, although I wouldn't say it's prudent.

It gets confused specifically because of what she said: it's not a religion anymore as much as a totalitarian manifesto that abuses Christians, women, etc.  Islam has pretty much morphed from a false religion to a tool of tyrannical dictators.  Not everywhere, of course.  There are still "noble" Muslims that are religious, try to follow the rules, don't want to kill non-believers at the drop of a hat, etc., but they're not the ones running the show.

The Koran has become political propaganda both by Islamic dictators and the American politicians.  She was burning it for the purpose of saying to politicans, "I have a right to do this."

As a religious statement it's a bad idea; as a political one, it's appropriate but I would argue imprudent.  The problem that comes from this is she, and her viewers, mix the two as is the wont of the totalitarian Islamists.  She makes a political speech and then criticizes the religious text.  Bad idea.  The Church burned books in areas they controlled for the purpose of stopping them from spreading; the Church didn't burn books as a statement.  It was utilitarian.  Burning books as a political statement is Protestant in origin.

Burn it, if you want, but burn it as a statement of free speech, not as a religious statement, and definitely don't mix them.  Clarity in statements is important for two reasons: 1) people understand you, 2) your enemies can't twist things as easily.

I applaud her for standing up what is right, for standing up for rights, for standing against a false religion.  But the methods she chose probably aren't the best.  If she took the burning out, I'd give her 5 stars plus a big X on her cheek and an O around her neck for calling Neo-Con Graham a jackass.  As it is, it's good political entertainment just like listening to Savage - it will fire up the existing base; it won't do much else.  Even if the leftists agree with her on the free speech, they're not going to admit she's right.  They'll call her a hater for burning the Koran and then go to the art show with Mary sculpted in elephant dung.  You know, business as usual.
Well said.

Also I understand the dangers of Islam as a religion and a political system. We must not lose the sight of the fact that Islam by definition is a state building religion. So it can by all means be a political statement. But I agree with you that by burning it you will not help bring over any of our Islamic friends any more than them burning copies of the New Testament  would help convert any Christians to Islam.

But let's not lose sight of the fact that the muzzies are anywhere near our biggest problem or impediment to freedom of expression going on right now in the U.S.

She would have done better to burn a copy of the Communist Manifesto.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)