Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Islam in America
J @ M @ L:
--- Quote from: CWalker187 on September 16, 2005, 07:07:01 PM ---JML lost another debate.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: King Techniec on September 16, 2005, 11:03:08 AM ---You gotta have a minimum IQ of 75 to come in this thread....mods...erase this chumps post
--- End quote ---
CWalker, learn how to read. You don't park in handicap parking spots when you see the signs, do you?
Anyways CWalker, your Polish pussy is still bloody from losing two arguments in a row to me, but keep your Communist ass away from me. I don't want the government thinking I'm affiliated with a new-age Stalin-Hitler crossbred faggot.
Real American:
The day you can prove that western culture is not superior is the day you win that debate, moron.
J @ M @ L:
--- Quote from: CWalker187 on September 16, 2005, 09:15:33 PM ---The day you can prove that western culture is not superior is the day you win that debate, moron.
--- End quote ---
The argument was based on what you considered Western Civilization, and what you felt made it superior.... based on those two arguments at hand, you lost. Sorry Polski.
The only reason I called you out on it was because you were implying that WHITE people are superior to non-Whites, as is evident from you only considering "Europe, the U.S., Canada, and Australia" as Western Civilization.... I admitted the word had many definitions and asked you on what implications you were only associating the term with those places listed.... you failed to include Japan for a reason, they're not white. You are a racist faggot. Once again, the Communists fall victim to the Afghans. 8)
Shallow:
--- Quote from: JML - no vowels, disembowel your Colin Powell, throw in the towel on September 16, 2005, 08:50:23 PM ---
--- Quote from: Shallow on September 16, 2005, 07:01:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: JML - no vowels, disembowel your Colin Powell, throw in the towel on September 16, 2005, 04:55:57 PM ---Actually I didn't take your posts out of context, since I quoted them directly, and/or addressed everything within your posts. I even addressed your clarifications, so don't bring that.
"We were just arguing different things and misconceiving what the other meant."
All I can say is: Speak for yourself.
Once again, have a good day. Save yourself the trouble... you've been done... and since you admitted how stubborn you are, there really is no point for me to reply to you since you reach for straws due to your stubbornness.
--- End quote ---
But you are ignoring my clarifications. When I said it's hard to convert Christians and it's easy to grow when the country is Christian as I meant and stated that I was talking about devout Christians and forceful conversion.
When I say we are arguing different things I meant I was under the impression you were speaking from the point of view that Islam is better and that's why it didn't need forceful conversion, which I was wrong to assume, and you thought I was associating every bad thing Muslim conquerers did with Muhammad and him being a part of it, which you were wrong to asume.
--- End quote ---
No I didn't ignore any of your classifications. I addressed every argument you made, I addressed your clarifications, and I addressed the part where you made your corrections.
You said it's hard to convert Christians with FORCE... I said I agree, which would back my argument.
You said it's easy to grow when the country is Christian... my response was:
"I know the growth rate works in percentages, and you're missing the whole point, even though I've stated it time and time again. The point I was making by saying that more people are converting from Christianity to Islam each year in America/Europe is that: Don't you think the same could've been true back then in lands where the majority of the population was Christian?"
Ok, so you admit that you had wrong assumptions, I can accept that... but no I did not at any point believe that you were associating every bad thing Muslim conquerors did with Mohammed... I even used your quote at the beginning where you made the reference to the Roman Empire... and I specifically said "keep this in mind throughout the argument".
--- End quote ---
Then why did you keep bringing up later conquests of Muslims that had nothing to do with Muhammad and ask me if I thought he was apart of them? You went back and forth and you can't deny that. You brought up later conquests like Spain and India then criticized me for talking about them when it had nothing to do with Muhammad.
"The point I was making by saying that more people are converting from Christianity to Islam each year in America/Europe is that: Don't you think the same could've been true back then in lands where the majority of the population was Christian?"
No I don't because Christian society is far more open these days. I'm willing to bet that the converts these days are mostly non practicing and/or protestants. Back then the church had a much stronger rule and it was accepted by society to convert, which is what it's like now in Islamic society. Catholism is far more controlling of a Christian religion now and I'll bet there are way less catholics converting than protestants. I feel that if Islamic societies deemed it acceptable to convert then there would be just as many Muslims converting as there are Christians converting (per capita). If you disagree, I'd like to hear why?
J @ M @ L:
--- Quote from: Shallow on September 16, 2005, 10:01:16 PM ---
--- Quote from: JML - no vowels, disembowel your Colin Powell, throw in the towel on September 16, 2005, 08:50:23 PM ---
--- Quote from: Shallow on September 16, 2005, 07:01:34 PM ---
--- Quote from: JML - no vowels, disembowel your Colin Powell, throw in the towel on September 16, 2005, 04:55:57 PM ---Actually I didn't take your posts out of context, since I quoted them directly, and/or addressed everything within your posts. I even addressed your clarifications, so don't bring that.
"We were just arguing different things and misconceiving what the other meant."
All I can say is: Speak for yourself.
Once again, have a good day. Save yourself the trouble... you've been done... and since you admitted how stubborn you are, there really is no point for me to reply to you since you reach for straws due to your stubbornness.
--- End quote ---
But you are ignoring my clarifications. When I said it's hard to convert Christians and it's easy to grow when the country is Christian as I meant and stated that I was talking about devout Christians and forceful conversion.
When I say we are arguing different things I meant I was under the impression you were speaking from the point of view that Islam is better and that's why it didn't need forceful conversion, which I was wrong to assume, and you thought I was associating every bad thing Muslim conquerers did with Muhammad and him being a part of it, which you were wrong to asume.
--- End quote ---
No I didn't ignore any of your classifications. I addressed every argument you made, I addressed your clarifications, and I addressed the part where you made your corrections.
You said it's hard to convert Christians with FORCE... I said I agree, which would back my argument.
You said it's easy to grow when the country is Christian... my response was:
"I know the growth rate works in percentages, and you're missing the whole point, even though I've stated it time and time again. The point I was making by saying that more people are converting from Christianity to Islam each year in America/Europe is that: Don't you think the same could've been true back then in lands where the majority of the population was Christian?"
Ok, so you admit that you had wrong assumptions, I can accept that... but no I did not at any point believe that you were associating every bad thing Muslim conquerors did with Mohammed... I even used your quote at the beginning where you made the reference to the Roman Empire... and I specifically said "keep this in mind throughout the argument".
--- End quote ---
Then why did you keep bringing up later conquests of Muslims that had nothing to do with Muhammad and ask me if I thought he was apart of them? You went back and forth and you can't deny that. You brought up later conquests like Spain and India then criticized me for talking about them when it had nothing to do with Muhammad.
"The point I was making by saying that more people are converting from Christianity to Islam each year in America/Europe is that: Don't you think the same could've been true back then in lands where the majority of the population was Christian?"
No I don't because Christian society is far more open these days. I'm willing to bet that the converts these days are mostly non practicing and/or protestants. Back then the church had a much stronger rule and it was accepted by society to convert, which is what it's like now in Islamic society. Catholism is far more controlling of a Christian religion now and I'll bet there are way less catholics converting than protestants. I feel that if Islamic societies deemed it acceptable to convert then there would be just as many Muslims converting as there are Christians converting (per capita). If you disagree, I'd like to hear why?
--- End quote ---
Wow you really are the must subborn person... anyways, I'll address everything once again... as I always do, and we'll see what else you try to pull out next...
Did I bring up later conquests first or did you first mention your ancestors in Greece/Cyprus? Thank you.
I'm not even going to say that you're contradicting yourself this time (which you are), but I'll just show you one line and tell you that the sentence in itself is contradicting...
"Back then the church had a much stronger rule and it was accepted by society to convert, which is what it's like now in Islamic society....
I feel that if Islamic societies deemed it acceptable to convert...."
Please for the sake of semi-intelligent human beings, don't tell me that isn't contradicting. Seriously, do you even fucking read what you type? You keep coming with these retarded statements and when I tell you that you contradict yourself, you say "No I don't, you do". Seriously, I feel like I keep refrying beans here.
As for your last statement, that is a hypothetical statement not based upon any facts. I don't agree or disagree, and quite frankly, you seem to care more than I do.
If you really care about that, and want to know, don't ask me, but rather go and do some research to find how many Muslims are converting to Christianity in countries where there is no so-called "Islamic" government (America, Europe, etc). I don't have the information at hand.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version