Why do liberals rush to defend islam?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have never met a Muslim in America who feels they need a Muslim government. Most Muslims I know much prefer the US because you are free to worship in whatever manner you choose.

FWIW I'm married to a Muslim and have tons of Muslim friends, both those born here and immigrants from many different cultures. The ability to worship freely is about the only common denominator they have.

I don't think the PP who brought this up meant to say that ALL Muslims want a shariah government, but that those who are drawn to and engage in terrorism want it (or are brainwashed into thinking that they do). Boko Haram, for example, has as one of its main goals the establishment of shariah law in Nigeria.

[Anonymous]

I've never understood why evolution freaks out Christians.

https://answersingenesis.org/creation-science/baraminology/not-so-common-descent/

Christians do not "freak out" over evolution --many Christians are biologists and scientists who do not accept common descent; we become exasperated because the ability to adapt to an environment, drawing upon genes within its population, does not in any way prove common descent. It simply proves creatures can change over time but within its created kind. Bacteria do not become buzzards over time, for example.

Sharing similar genes that perform similar functions (roundness for example) is not proof either.

When we use operational science—the kind involving observable, repeatable, testable results—we have never observed, repeated, or been able to test animal kind A turning into animal kind B—at all.
https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-against-evolution

We share not a common ancestor but a common Designer.
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/what-makes-us-human/uniqueness-of-humans/

https://answersingenesis.org/evolution/


My authority concerning this are the scientists at Answers In Genesis. They interpret the data through a world view that acknowleges God, just as atheist scientists interpret the data through a secular world view.

Everyone chooses an authority to believe. There is no proof we evolved from apes, only peer-reviewed parroted papers all saying the same thing of "it probably happened this way", "research indicates...", "we think...we believe" etc.

If the science was settled, such as the roundness of the earth which can be observed, then there would be no argument. The issue is only settled in the minds of certain scientists whose minds are cemented against Christ.

It is similar to the "science" of global warming. There are no experiments that show "x-amount of carbon introduced into the atmosphere results in y-amount of climate change." There are no studies of this only hand-waving and chest-beating that we better believe the "science" or else we'll all suffer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I've never understood why evolution freaks out Christians.

https://answersingenesis.org/creation-science/baraminology/not-so-common-descent/

Christians do not "freak out" over evolution --many Christians are biologists and scientists who do not accept common descent; we become exasperated because the ability to adapt to an environment, drawing upon genes within its population, does not in any way prove common descent. It simply proves creatures can change over time but within its created kind. Bacteria do not become buzzards over time, for example.

Sharing similar genes that perform similar functions (roundness for example) is not proof either.

When we use operational science—the kind involving observable, repeatable, testable results—we have never observed, repeated, or been able to test animal kind A turning into animal kind B—at all.
https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-against-evolution

We share not a common ancestor but a common Designer.
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/what-makes-us-human/uniqueness-of-humans/

https://answersingenesis.org/evolution/


My authority concerning this are the scientists at Answers In Genesis. They interpret the data through a world view that acknowleges God, just as atheist scientists interpret the data through a secular world view.

Everyone chooses an authority to believe. There is no proof we evolved from apes, only peer-reviewed parroted papers all saying the same thing of "it probably happened this way", "research indicates...", "we think...we believe" etc.

If the science was settled, such as the roundness of the earth which can be observed, then there would be no argument. The issue is only settled in the minds of certain scientists whose minds are cemented against Christ.

It is similar to the "science" of global warming. There are no experiments that show "x-amount of carbon introduced into the atmosphere results in y-amount of climate change." There are no studies of this only hand-waving and chest-beating that we better believe the "science" or else we'll all suffer.

Nobody is claiming that we descended from apes. We share a common ancestor. Huge, critical difference.

And the science is as settled as science can be. It is extraordinarily well-substantiated through repeated testing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here is an excellent article concerning this:

http://www.returnofkings.com/52882/why-does-the-left-support-radical-muslims

"About" this publication: "Return Of Kings is a blog for heterosexual, masculine men. It’s meant for a small but vocal collection of men in America today who believe men should be masculine and women should be feminine."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is an excellent article concerning this:

http://www.returnofkings.com/52882/why-does-the-left-support-radical-muslims

"About" this publication: "Return Of Kings is a blog for heterosexual, masculine men. It’s meant for a small but vocal collection of men in America today who believe men should be masculine and women should be feminine."

Sooo, insecure men with micropenises.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cnn is deferential to religions that will kill them. Let's just be honest , they are scared. Why don't they just admit that they are too frightened to speak so we can get a handle on what the situation really is?

So does that mean that CNN is deferential to Christianity because they think Christians will kill them? Or have you seen CNN portray Christ in one way or another yourself, meaning CNN is not afraid of Christians? Because I have yet to see Christ on CNN at all. You're really not making much sense.

not pp, but will say that CNN has shown Jesus on the cross in a jar of urine, clearly not respectful to many. It will not show a cartoon of Mohammed holding a sign because it offends some groups. That could be seen as hypocritical.

So pp is pointing out that CNN is more careful of those offended about art of Mohammed than those offended about art of Jesus Christ.

Okay, nice to have some actual information here instead of supposition. Thanks for mentioning that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Liberals are conflicted. They are generally cynical about religious activity. But Islam is practiced by "oppressed" people, in some places, so there's that. Hard to square the condemnations of the war on women in this country with the generally sexist and medieval-ish treatment of women in Arab countries. It's a type of cognitive dissonance. But you won't lose popular points for holding these views (or posing as such).

No one supports the way women are oppressed in some Arab countries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neville Chamberlain is all you need to know about liberals. Liberals are about appeasement, of "trying to get along" whatever the cost. However, there appears to be an exception: if your authority on faith and morals is the bible and upon Jesus Christ then there is no getting along, only censorship, the gulag, work camps, sensitivity training, and "rehabilitation".

Wow, this is brilliant thinking -- Neville Chamberlain! Is it possible for you to make a stupider comparison? Oh, no, stupid isn't really the word. Lazy is the word I want. You didn't even bother to think about the actual problem. If I were to make arguments by comparing conservatives to Joe McCarthy I would deserve every bit of condemnation that would follow. And yes, liberals all want to send Christians to the gulag. Such an effective argument, such incisive thinking!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They hate America . Anything that weakens America or individual liberty, they are for. Christianity was around the whole time the USA became the greatest and most powerful/free country on the planet. Liberals instinctively hate the empowerment of the individual ... Islam helps destroy the individual.

1. Islam isn't a "they"
2. Islam was also "around the whole time" - truly not sure what you mean by that
3. Liberals celebrate the empowerment of the individual - we instinctively hate systems that oppress individuals
4. You know nothing about Islam

Look at all the people who came here from Iran after the fall of the Shah and call themselves Persians. People from Turkey who live here. I could continue but I guess a good analogy is in Catholicism- people and groups behaving violently under Islam are like the obsolete Spanish Inquisition and the Medieval Inquisition.

Christianity has evolved -Martin Luther, protestants etc. Judaism has evolved.

They call themselves Persians because that's what they are ethnically. It's got nothing to do with religion and everything to do with not being identified as Iranian and not being Arab.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is an excellent article concerning this:

http://www.returnofkings.com/52882/why-does-the-left-support-radical-muslims

"About" this publication: "Return Of Kings is a blog for heterosexual, masculine men. It’s meant for a small but vocal collection of men in America today who believe men should be masculine and women should be feminine."

Sooo, insecure men with micropenises.

A great description of these radical Islamists !!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have never met a Muslim in America who feels they need a Muslim government. Most Muslims I know much prefer the US because you are free to worship in whatever manner you choose.

FWIW I'm married to a Muslim and have tons of Muslim friends, both those born here and immigrants from many different cultures. The ability to worship freely is about the only common denominator they have.

This is so true. The Muslims I know are the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cnn is deferential to religions that will kill them. Let's just be honest , they are scared. Why don't they just admit that they are too frightened to speak so we can get a handle on what the situation really is?

That's what happens when a network hires pussies like Anderson Cooper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cnn is deferential to religions that will kill them. Let's just be honest , they are scared. Why don't they just admit that they are too frightened to speak so we can get a handle on what the situation really is?

That's what happens when a network hires pussies like Anderson Cooper.

Ha ha! You are just a silly troll, aren't you? Otherwise you'd come up with some actual data instead of lazy slurs like this. But I suppose you could be a sincere poster and just stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neville Chamberlain is all you need to know about liberals. Liberals are about appeasement, of "trying to get along" whatever the cost. However, there appears to be an exception: if your authority on faith and morals is the bible and upon Jesus Christ then there is no getting along, only censorship, the gulag, work camps, sensitivity training, and "rehabilitation".

Wow, this is brilliant thinking -- Neville Chamberlain! Is it possible for you to make a stupider comparison? Oh, no, stupid isn't really the word. Lazy is the word I want. You didn't even bother to think about the actual problem. If I were to make arguments by comparing conservatives to Joe McCarthy I would deserve every bit of condemnation that would follow. And yes, liberals all want to send Christians to the gulag. Such an effective argument, such incisive thinking!

Neville Chamberlain epitomizes naive hope http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/12/18/the_naive_hope_of_liberalism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rise_of_Neville_Chamberlain
Chamberlain was very interested in city planning for Birmingham. In November 1911, standing as a Liberal Unionist, he was elected to Birmingham City Council for All Saints' Ward

Chamberlain was a member of the Conservative Party which merged with the Liberal Unionist Party in 1912, it changed its official name to the Conservative and Unionist Party.
Good ole Neville buddy was from the liberal wing of that union. He was NOT a conservative politician. He was a liberal.

[Anonymous]

Centralized government power cannot ever be trusted. People are too corrupt to be given the reigns.